I'm a big fan of "The Pontificator" There is so much great stuff to read on his blog. I offer you this bit and encourage you to check out his blog.
Pontificator’s Decalogue
First Law: When Orthodoxy and Catholicism agree, Protestantism loses.
Second Law: When the Bible alone is our authority, the Bible ceases to be our authority.
Third Law: It’s one thing to read Scripture and the Fathers; it’s quite another thing to read Scripture through the Fathers.
Fourth Law: A church that does not understand itself as the Church, outside of which there is no salvation, is not the Church but a denomination or sect.
Fifth Law: When it comes to doctrine, earlier is better, except when it’s not.
Sixth Law: When the Church Fathers and the Rabbis of the Talmud agree on a commandment of God, odds are God spoke it.
Seventh Law: Justification by faith is not a theory of salvation; it is the verbal and sacramental enactment of salvation.
Eighth Law: Any christology, soteriology, or ecclesiology that undermines the Church’s evangelistic mission to the heathen and their baptismal conversion to Jesus Christ is wrong.
Ninth Law: If a Catholic cannot name at least one article of faith that he believes principally on the basis of the authoritative teaching of the Magisterium, he’s either a saint or a Protestant.
Tenth Law: All dogmas of the Church Catholic are infallible, but some are more infallible than others.
28 comments:
"Fourth Law: A church that does not understand itself as the Church, outside of which there is no salvation, is not the Church but a denomination or sect."
~What is meant by salvation is only found in the Church?
I don't know what aphorism means and tautology is one I'll have to jog my menory on. Aside from that, does this mean the Roman Catholic church only? Also, doesn't "salvation is the Church" conflict with salvation is in Jesus alone?
~Mark, I've gotten as many different answers as Catholics I've asked this of.
I'll try my best to give a clear and honest answer.
Some people claim that the Second Vatican Council reversed previous Church teaching that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. That's why there is confusion.
The Catholic position on “no salvation outside the Church” has not changed.
What Vatican II sought to do is clarify the meaning.
If Jesus is God, and He left us the Catholic Church as His instrument of salvation on earth, then we cannot of ourselves create some other means of salvation than the one God gave us. In other words, we can’t say to God: “Thanks for your plan, but I’ll do it my own way.”
What Vatican II had to say on the subject was that some have a saving communion with the Church even if they don’t have an intellectual understanding of such.
In other words, they are members of the Church, albeit in an imperfect way, but are not within the visible confines of the Church.
Vatican II said that if a person is, through no fault of their own, ignorant of the fact that the Catholic Church is the true Church, such a person may attain salvation although they are in an impoverished situation. A person who knows the Catholic Church is true and refuses to embrace the Catholic faith would be accountable for the refusal of God’s plan of salvation.
In short, God doesn’t hold us accountable for what we are innocently ignorant of. He will hold us accountable if we know and refuse, or purposely choose to deny, the light given us and remain in ignorance.
"If Jesus is God, and He left us the Catholic Church as His instrument of salvation on earth,"
"the Catholic Church is the true Church, such a person may attain salvation although they are in an impoverished situation. A person who knows the Catholic Church is true"
2 questions. First, where does the belief that the Catholic Church is the "true instrument" come from, and second, does this mean then that a person who is saved by Christ through the work of a missionary and has not encountered any established church group, is automatically Catholic by salvation?
If Jesus is God, and He left us the Catholic Church as His instrument of salvation on earth,
This is a terrible statement!
SINCE Jesus IS God, He presents His Own BLOOD as the instrument of salvation.
The rest of PBall's post puts salvation in the hands of the RCC, stripping it from the One who came in full obedience and presented Himself the Lamb of God spotless and righteous. God will not spare those who deny His Son.
... ignorant of the fact...
I take solace in the fact that God said, "When I see the blood I will pass over you."
Why do you say that the church is not an instrument of salvation, I would think all churches, not just the Catholic church serve as instruments to our salvation.
Christ is the instrument of salvation, not ANY institution run by man.
Why do you say that the church is not an instrument of salvation, I would think all churches, not just the Catholic church serve as instruments to our salvation.
I say this because NOWHERE in Scripture do we have the Churcvh as the Intrument of salvation. Notice carefully what the following passage actually says in plain language:
Acts 2:47 - ... And THE LORD ADDED TO THE CHURCH daily such as should be saved.
The Church is made up of those who ARE SAVED BY THE LORD and ADDED BY HIM ALONE. The Church doesn't save, nor does it 'collect' souls in membership.
It is Christ's Church and He administers it fully. He decides ALL - Eph 1:22 says - "And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him [that is Christ] to be head over everything for the church,..."
Well then, if the church is not an instrument towards our salvation then why do we go????
Well then, if the church is not an instrument towards our salvation then why do we go????
You didn't just ask that ...
Read my comments again. The Church is comprised of the SAVED, it is not the MEANS of salvation.
We do not go TO church to be a part OF the Church (note the capitalization).
We go to church BECAUSE we are part of the Church. The Bible instructs us to be found with others calling upon God out of a pure heart. We are also told not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together - especially as we see the day of Christ's return approaching.
Christianity has both a personal and a corporate side.
Scripture 1 Tim 3:15 states that the church is the pillar.
Eph. 5: 25-26 Christ loved the church.
Where does it say that the church is just comprised of the saved?
Why does everyone ignore all of the other posts that are here and just deal with the ones involving religious beliefs? It usually leads to an ugly verbal battle with nothing solved.
As for the actual list...
First Law: When Orthodoxy and Catholicism agree, Protestantism loses.
So then Protestantism wins when they disagree? It must be doing well then!
Second Law: When the Bible alone is our authority, the Bible ceases to be our authority.
How so?
Third Law: It’s one thing to read Scripture and the Fathers; it’s quite another thing to read Scripture through the Fathers.
And it becomes alive by being read through prayer, fasting and the Holy Spirit!
Fourth Law: A church that does not understand itself as the Church, outside of which there is no salvation, is not the Church but a denomination or sect.
So a subset of the whole if not assuring itself that it is the whole is a subset of the whole? Glad to see this one was well thought out. The Church is ALL redeemed ones - independent of ANYTHING ELSE.
Fifth Law: When it comes to doctrine, earlier is better, except when it’s not.
No comment.
Sixth Law: When the Church Fathers and the Rabbis of the Talmud agree on a commandment of God, odds are God spoke it.
So now men are the test for the divinity? Men's agreement has NOTHING to do with the Word of God.
Seventh Law: Justification by faith is not a theory of salvation; it is the verbal and sacramental enactment of salvation.
As a non-catholic I believe in justification by faith through grace gifted to me by God Himself, not of works lest I would have that which would cause me pride and lead me to think I were better than another.
Eighth Law: Any christology, soteriology, or ecclesiology that undermines the Church’s evangelistic mission to the heathen and their baptismal conversion to Jesus Christ is wrong.
I don't disagree... but don't forget the mission of the Church towards God comes BEFORE it's mission to Man.
Ninth Law: If a Catholic cannot name at least one article of faith that he believes principally on the basis of the authoritative teaching of the Magisterium, he’s either a saint or a Protestant.
He's simply ignorant of what he says he believes.
Tenth Law: All dogmas of the Church Catholic are infallible, but some are more infallible than others.
Where and when did infallibility get degreed? Something is either free of error or not. There's no shades of gray.
Scripture 1 Tim 3:15 states that the church is the pillar.
The pillar and ground of what? the Truth of God. The Church, all the redeemed, hold up and stand on the Truth of God. Not sure how you are connecting it.
Eph. 5: 25-26 Christ loved the church.
And gave Himself for it, that he might present it to Himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.
Who will be presented to Christ blamless? Onl;y those who are washed int he blood of the Lamb and have thier names in the Lamb's book of Life.
Where does it say that the church is just comprised of the saved?
The Passage you just quoted, when taken in context wih the whole of Scripture brings out this truth very clearly.
Also look the passage in Acts, where it explicitly says how souls are made part of the Church.
What makes you think the Church is comprised partly of the unregenerate, those that defy God, those that will not have his Son to reign over them? What makes you think that He would even welcome them in - unless they were to be washed in the blood of the Lamb?
Why does everyone ignore all of the other posts that are here and just deal with the ones involving religious beliefs? It usually leads to an ugly verbal battle with nothing solved.
I don't know why you continually come back to this point. I don't see you commenting on other posts either. I've asked you to - but you are silent, save for this complaint.
Don't spiritual things interest you?
Are you not searching for the Truth?
Do you have nothing to contribute?
Are you affraid you might hear something that would rip the rug out from beneath you?
I am hoping to hear something like this! I am not content in my current state - I want more don't you?
For your information, I have commented on other posts, but I seem to stand alone in doing so. spiritual things do interest me, but this is nothing but a verbal battleground when it comes to that topic and no, I'm not afraid of hearing something that might rip the rug out from me, my faith is strong.
And, I'm not the only person who has made the comment about no one answering other blogs.
who among us is an authority or scholar on the bible.
qmhyclTo Sprocket: Why don't you respond to some of the other blogs like you told anon. too.
Anon 3:57: If a post attacks your faith, wouldn't you stand up and try to counter it? What kind of witness would we be to our faith if we didn't stand up for it? Do you think Powerball should have stayed silent when Minto went off against Catholicism?
Several of those opinions (which the author arrogantly calls "laws") outright slap non-Catholic beliefs in the face.
Now, as to the post itself, to "Law" #1, I'd say that when Protestantism and the Bible agree, Catholicism and Orthodoxy lose.
Anon,
Which anon are you referring to?
Anon, did you mean other posts or other blogs? If so, which other blogs?
Which anon was your anon comment directed towards?
To Anon: I meant other blogs or comments posted on this site, I agree with the person who said that no one partakes in dealing with anything unless its a debate regarding the Bible, and it goes on back and forth with both sides getting no where because they're interpretations are different.
Is anonymous the same person?
As far as where people post, what's it to you? I don't ask that rudely, just for real: why do you keep asking that? Who would ever know if you post in other topics since you only post as "anonymous"?
We've been having a good discussion that is actually going somewhere on Pontificator's blog.
http://catholica.pontifications.net/?p=1711#comments
qmhyclTo Sprocket: Why don't you respond to some of the other blogs like you told anon. too.
I'm not all that interested in some of the other postings... when I am I do post.
It isn't a case for my 'following my own advice' because I already post where I am interested. If Anon is interested then he should go there and stir up conversation - not complain about it.
To Mark: Does it matter how one signs their name when replying to a post? Is Mark your real name?
Anon:
Its just difficult to keep track of, since there seems to be more than one anonymous posting.
Post a Comment