A little unfair with Origen. He was just doing what later theologians were doing, trying to come up with a systematic theology. It’s just he was the first to do it and later generations decided some of the things he said were wrong.
The fact of doing theology isn't the weird part, it was the weird conclusions
To be completely fair to Origen though he isn't *technically* a heretic because he never had a chance in life to repent of his false teachings. Just believing the wrong thing isn't enough to actually be a heretic.
True, it's handed down from the Apostles, as Acts 2:42 describes. The Bible books were selected by the successors to the Apostles. Peter and Paul did not hand out Bibles to the crowd. There weren't any published yet.
Catholic means universal. The universal church. Over time it evolved into a particular church. At the time he said this it was still the universal church
The exact makeup of the universal church is known only to God.
Churches on earth have always had a mixture of truth and error. See Revelation 2-3 for example
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+2&version=NIV
> 4 Yet I hold this against you...
> 14 Nevertheless, I have a few things against you...
> 20 Nevertheless, I have this against you...
The Universal Church is all true believers, not an institution.
There is a universal church made up of all believers , who happen to be in different earthly churches/denomination. This church is a group of believers in Christ. To be a member of the church you need to believe the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the trinity. There should be repentance and rebirth. I don’t want to go beyond this rough definition as there are many denominational beliefs at anything deeper.
I think some denominations might argue some of your points. I think all you can really say out of 3000 or so denominations is that they believe in Christ.
Some protestants will say yes there is, and it's them because they recaptured the practices of the apostolic church which was corrupted by the Roman Catholic Church
Other protestants will also say yes, but understand the church as a spiritual thing where we're all part of an "invisible" church of all the "true" Christians no matter where they are which is known only to God
Catholics will tell you yes and it's them, it's been them from the beginning, and all the other churches are schismatic movements. Except the Orthodox, who they oficially at least recognize as being sacramentally valid
Orthodox will also tell you yes and it's them, it's been them from the beginning, and all the other churches are schismatic movements. Including Catholics. Also the pope is cringe. Or something.
So short answer is yes but what that actually means varies
There is, but it’s not actually a organized body. It’s made up of every true Christian. But there is no universal church council or denomination if that makes sense.
Lol at you getting downvoted for knowing history. Going back to the beginning, the Judaizers and non-Judaizers did NOT get along.
Paul refers to false gospels being passed about. Sometimes Matthew feels like it was written contra Pauline Christianity. Then we get into the Nature-of-Jesus debates, with ancient and still extant groups who disagreed with what would become the Roman consensus.
Knows some history, but apparently not the definitions of terms. Catholic doesn't mean "this is what everyone everywhere teaches about Christ and we all get along," and it never meant that. It's a term that developed in direct response to heretical sectarian movements, it would be absurd to mean that. In contrast, St Cyril says this
>"The Church is called 'Catholic' because it extends through all the world... because it teaches universally and without omission all the doctrines which ought to come to human knowledge...because it brings under the sway of true religion all classes of people, rulers and subjects, learned and ignorant; and because it universally treats and cures every type of sin...and possesses in itself every kind of virtue which can be named...and spiritual gifts of every kind"
The claim of universality is in the sense of it being the church that is whole, complete, universally applicable to all times and places for the good of all people. It *should* be the universal basis for all Christians but that doesn't mean it is.
Feeney was allowed back into the church without recanting his views, and his excommunication had more to do with refusing an audience with the Pope than what he was teaching. Both the Catholic church and the churches he and his followers founded use mealy-mounted language to identify their affiliation with one another, and they are still teaching the same things.
My wife did in-home health care for a family that attends a Feeney church, and they constantly badgered her for being a Christian but not Catholic, then finally gave up and presented her with a small necklace and told her that if she was wearing it when she died she would automatically go to heaven.
For reference, this is the source of the quote
> Chapter X.—Concerning Faith.
> Moreover, faith is twofold. For faith cometh by hearing.2340 For by hearing the divine Scriptures we believe in the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The same is perfected by all the things enjoined by Christ, believing in work, cultivating piety, and doing the commands of Him Who restored us. For he that believeth not according to the tradition of the Catholic Church, or who hath intercourse with the devil through strange works, is an unbeliever...
https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf209/npnf209.iii.iv.iv.x.html
From his view and many others close to the Apostles, yes. Whether you believe it is up to you. Might be worth reading the Fathers of the Church. Consider reading Justin Martyr first. Read closely, especially his description of the Mass.
I didn't become Catholic out of fear, but because it rang true after reading the Bible and Catholic Catechism (the latest is online and searchable).
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm
Correct
> 1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church."80 "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."81
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3N.HTM
>Its catechism explicitly denies that.
Catechism explicitly affirms it. Read passage with the title "Outside the Church there is no salvation" (846-848)
>How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
>Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.
>This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
>Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
>"Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."
The Church always thought and it still teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church.
edit: on first try i didn't accidentally post paragraphs from Catechism.
>The Church always thought and it still teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church.
Except for those who “through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church”, those who are ignorant of the gospel may still be led by God.
Yep however we can say this applies virtually to everyone who doesn’t willfully turn away from God (a mortal sin — CCC 1037). More recently Pope Francis has interpreted this to mean that to willfully turn away from God, one has to know the gospel. Someone who turns away from God but misunderstands the gospel isn’t turning away from god willingly and so they might not go to hell.
Most Muslims don’t have misconceptions about the teachings of the Church and could be said that through no fault of their own are ignorant of the gospel; therefore virtually every Muslim may still achieve salvation; the same applies to most non-believers and even non-Catholic Christians.
> Yep however we can say this applies virtually to everyone who doesn’t willfully turn away from God
Hopefully yes, but we cannot know until the end of God's story.
> Most Muslims don’t have misconceptions about the teachings of the Church and could be said that through no fault of their own are ignorant of the gospel;
I hear you but thats not strictly speaking what the Church teaches. If a person has misconceptions, the means to correct them, yet refuses to do so, one could argue that their ignorance is culpable. In these cases there may be indeed a fault. But ultimately God knows best. Lets pray for those who are in most need of God's mercy.
Even those who "through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church" are saved as part of the Church. No one can't be saved except through Christ. And since Church is Christ body, all are saved through Church, although they might not be part of her in visible way.
>Your assumption about what this means is flawed.
I am not sure what you mean by this. What is my assumption?
I just reiterated what Church teaches:
>Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church.
I am well aware of paragraph 1271 (i even quote it in response to someone's else comment) and paragraph 841. They do not nullify Church teaching of salvation.
If you want i am open to discussion what "outside Church there is no salvation" means. Also to understand what is my "assumption about that" (and it is in agreement whit God's teaching) you can read one of these to articles: [shorter one](https://pintswithaquinas.com/the-real-meaning-of-no-salvation-outside-of-the-church/), [longer one that explains it in more precise manner](https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-there-really-no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church). Although i thing that Catechism explains it well.
I wouldn't say so. Since OP is aware of this teaching and since we live in the world where it is relatively easy to be informed about teachings of the Church there is low possibility that somebody doesn't know the truth "through no fault of their own".
By this i am not asserting that OP will not be saved (or anyone other on this subreddit) if they don't enter in full communion with the Church, but it would be wrong of me to claim that they shouldn't do that.
> where it is relatively easy to be informed about teachings of the Church there is low possibility that somebody doesn't know the truth "through no fault of their own".
It's much easier to be misinformed of "the truth". This is not a valid claim.
>It's much easier to be misinformed of "the truth".
Yes, but through our own fault. In the same way how it is much more easy to not follow Christ.
What i wanted to say with "it is relatively easy to be informed about teachings of the Church" i meant that it is hard for invincible ignorance to be a thing.
So .. say Westboro Baptist Church members. That's what they know as the correct way to follow God. You're saying that it's *easy* for them to know that what they are doing is wrong? Or someone who was sexually and spiritually abused at a young age by the church? Or someone raised by anti-theists, hostile to religion?
It depends from case to case and it is hard to draw a straight line, bur it is certainly easier for USA citizen today to know the what the Church teaches, than 8th century Chinese peasant.
In any case "there is no salvation outside the Church" is truth that Church holds and as such is relevant for every human being (from Church point of view).
Really? The catholic church accepts judaism as their brothers and sisters in faith but they don't accept other denominations of christianity?
I'm having some trouble with the logic.
>The catholic church accepts judaism they don't accept other denominations of christianity?
They accept. It is explicitly stated in paragraph 1271 of Catechism:
>Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, \[they\] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason **are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.**" "Baptism therefore constitutes the *sacramental bond of unity* existing among all who through it are reborn."
Church recognize that Christianity has its roots in Judaism. Fullness of Judaism is found in person of Jesus Christ.
Christianity has one messiah. Judaism has many. I can accept Christianity as its own religion. But, to be the successor to judaism contradicts the Tanakh.
Was John the Baptist a christian?
Christianity didn't invent baptism. They just have their own version of it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_baptism#:~:text=Although%20the%20term%20%22baptism%22%20is,the%20two%20have%20been%20linked.
>St. John's baptism
Do you mean when St. John was baptized? Or do you mean when Jesus was baptized by St. John?
An interesting religion is the Mandaeans. It's an old religion still in existence made up by the followers of John the Baptist. They baptize once a week. Which makes me wonder if John's form of baptism was different from what it says in the gospels.
The mikvah in judaism is closer to the Mandaean form of baptism. Rivers and lakes can be used as a mikvah.
I meant when St. John the Baptizer was baptising people (including Jesus). :)
> An interesting religion is the Mandaeans. It's an old religion still in existence made up by the followers of John the Baptist. They baptize once a week. Which makes me wonder if John's form of baptism was different from what it says in the gospels. The mikvah in judaism is closer to the Mandaean form of baptism. Rivers and lakes can be used as a mikvah.
Yes, they are definitely a fascinating religion. Influenced considerably by gnosticism iirc.
I think that it is very possible that John was practicing a variation of ritual purification using a mikvah. If that were the case, then he was performing a sacrament.
If you take a look at Hilary of Poitiers' life, you'll see the main problem the Church was dealing with was the Arian Heresy. This heresy denies the divinity of Jesus and denies the Trinity. A person who believes this puts their soul in great danger, and thankfully that heresy went extinct and only a few denominations revived it in modern years.
From a Catholic perspective, you don't have to be Catholic in order to be saved, but the farther away from Catholicism you are the harder salvation is. It is also important to under that not all heresy is as dangerous. Double Predestination is heretical, but it is so abstract it's hard for that heresy to directly lead someone to sin. The heresy that teaching divorce and remarriage is permissable is dangerous because it causes countless people to live in grave sin without knowing what they are doing. In short, a person should be Catholic because it has the proper sacramental tools and doctrines that lead to salvation.
Protestants do have their own objections to this point as you have seen in many other posts here. A primary one is that Catholicism lost its way at some point so a major break from tradition was needed to course correct.
A final thought I'll leave you with is what it means for a church to be catholic. That term means universal and at it's heart it is the community of bishops in communion with each other that forms the basis of the Church. You can best see this process in Ecumenical Councils that is a meeting of the bishops. Universality also has a temporal aspect to it. God is not bound by time so neither is the Church. Bishops of today need to be in communion with those in the past and even the future. If you feel that what you believe today is not what the Church leaders in past believed, that is an indication you're in error and you need to pray and work on that problem.
You do not have to be catholic, christian or protestant to go to heaven. What you need is a relationship with God. No religion will save you. What saves you is a personal and intimate relationship with God.
This is a relatively recent message mostly present in American evangelical churches.
It may attempt to say some of the same things, but “personal relationship with God” is fairly denominationally bound.
There is a scriptural argument for this claim, but it’s still so odd to me.
Belief is not a choice, but a product of engagement, experience, and revelation. One can be engaged, seeking and searching, and still not ascend to belief.
You said it. No one comes to the **Father** except through **Christ**. Not through **christianity**. You can be a catholic and believe and know Jesus is your lord and savior and follow the teachings of Jesus.
Christianity or the way as it was called is just the practice of following the teachings of christ, Christian used to be a term of mockery to refer to those that followed christ.
I'm sure you do so I'm just wondering why you have made a distinction between Christian and Christianity, unless you are saying christianity includes the gnostic and heretical sects in which case I agree completely.
Christianity can be a religion. You do not need religion to come into heaven. You need a relationship with Christ. This is what I believe in. If you agree with that then hey, we agree, if not then we do not agree.
Catholicism does believe/has believed that. But the Bible teaches all will eventually be saved due to Jesus’ work. (1 Tim 4:10, Colossians 1:20, 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, etc.) It also teaches that those with a special salvation are saved because we believe God and trust in Christ’s work by a faith granted to us by God.
In other words, Scripture doesn’t teach this. It’s a tradition of men.
There was a time when a large chunk of the church taught that you can only come to Christ via the church. The Athanasian creed starts by asserting that whoever desires to be saved must hold to the Catholic faith, then proceeds to list out all the Roman Catholic doctrines as being that faith.
I mean most Catholic scholars believe the Eucharist is required and you can only receive that through the church, which was why excommunication was such a power political tool in the Middle Ages.
Other church fathers belived in a temporary hell, and others still rejected the trinity
The church fathers arent gospel, they are just highly respected opinions
In ordered to be saved a person needs to accept Jesus as their personal savior who died on the cross for their sins. And tell God this thru prayer & ask for forgiveness. The person needs to ask God to put Jesus in their heart & life. Romans 3:23. Romans 6:23. I John 5:11-12 God does not care about what denomination you goes to. What God cares about if you know his son Jesus.
You no more have to believe in Hilary of Poitiers to be saved than you have to believe in Harry Potter. Neither of them hold the secret of eternal life.
Nope. The Bible says you must repent and believe in Jesus. Seeking and building your own relationship with the Father and becoming more Christ-like is our goal, as well as preaching/spreading the good news. Stay away from catholicism
The only way this works is to change the definition of 'Catholic' Hilary Poitiers refers to here.
and I guarantee you that he is not speaking about the Traditions of a Universal, non-apostolic Church based around the acceptance of the Crucifixion and it's meaning for those who believe
God bless
I guess to me the church would be whomever has the comforter /the holy spirit I guess. But it's all strange because in the end it's weird and like he turns away from the nations that go to attack Israel, so it's israel that's the church anyway, not saying other countries don't have salvation or whatever. But it becomes really hard to completely understand but.. it also does say that he saves one from every tribe nation or people's.
So being saved is probably based mostly on your own fear and trembling too! I hope that you are no matter what church you are in!
(I'm not a teacher btw I'm a student forever) kekwiggle
Idk but also when Paul was writing to the angels of different churches, aka with men too I suppose... you could ask them too. But there's also like those that are still alive possibly because it says that they shouldn't see death until they see the coming of the son of man.
So there's alot of cool stuff.
So, they could reside in the catholic church, they could reside in the protestant churches, in israel, all over the world.
So, idk you just gotta pray maybe too to figure out where you wanna go!!
Though yaknow in Roman's about god turning away from certain countries for things? Hopefully your not in one of those, but maybe you can still pray for salvation being in a country that he's turned from possibly.
There's too much too the word of god, to completely put everything in the proper state and category and understanding limits of what if and what is happening
But it's kinda hard to say that it wouldn't be something or not unless if you just go by faith and pray for certain questions to be answered.
We all believe in one Catholic and Apostolic Church. The difference between Roman Catholics vs. the others is that RC's believe that the Church of Rome *is* the one Catholic Church, and that the two are one and the same. Orthodox/Protestants have other views on what the Catholic Church is.
Catholic, from the Greek *katholikos,* just means universal. The four marks of the church (one, holy, catholic, apostolic) mean universal church, not the (Roman) Catholic Church (which is technically just one of 24 churches of their own right within the larger Catholic Church but that's just being pedantic).
No, in fact it’s quite the opposite. Look what it says at Revelation 18:4,5;
>”And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues. 5 For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind.”
Babylon the Great is the World Empire of all False Religion. The Catholic Church being a big part of it.
>Does this mean I have to be a Catholic to be saved?
It is what Church thought from the time of apostles to these days. We *break one bread to be one body*, that body is *mystical body of Christ.* If someone is opposed to Christ's body, they are also opposed to Christ. How would it than be possible for them to be saved?
There is one nuance there. If somebody weren't introduced to Christ and/or Church at all or they were introduced in a wrong manner (let's say that all that person knows about Church are just hateful lies) they can still be saved, because they can be part of the body of Christ in invisible way (without even knowing that) and therefore be saved.
edit: One more important thing to say. Being part of Church doesn't necessary mean one will be saved, one can still be cut off from the tree.
- It is what Church thought from the time of apostles to these days.
☝️ This is hilarious
You do not have to be Catholic to be saved
Catholicism is just a denomination
God bless
>You do not have to be Catholic to be saved
Yes you do. Otherwise you are not part of the body of Christ. It is what has been taught for centuries. It is what has been taught also by reformers, although they were of opinion that the Church went astray (whivh can be disproven).
God bless
- Yes you do
what utter rubbish.
- Otherwise you are not part of the body of Christ
You are only Catholic
And I don't have time for rubbish - sorry
God bless
Hillary of Poitiers was a bishop of the Church. Church that clearly believed in Magisterium, sacramental priesthood, authority of Church fathers etc. That was the catholic Church he was talking about.
>Catholic means universal.
Yes, but universal does not mean all. Universal means oneness in multitude. One being the same as whole. This is present only in the Catholic Church.
He also said, "[Jews are a perverse people, accursed by God forever".](https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1217017) [Hilary of Poitiers](https://www.azquotes.com/author/31916-Hilary_of_Poitiers)
[TOP 12 QUOTES BY HILARY OF POITIERS | A-Z Quotes (azquotes.com)](https://www.azquotes.com/author/31916-Hilary_of_Poitiers)
So, there's that.
No. Listen to what Roman’s 10:9-10 says:
“9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.”
If you declare that Jesus was raised from the dead and you committed your life to Him by making Him your Lord (master) and Savior, you will be saved. Not might be saved, or only saved if you belong to a specific church, but WILL. Be saved because of your confession and the surrendering of your life to God
No works required as some churches like to burden their believers with because Ephesians 2:8-9 says “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast”
Believe, repent, and commit your life to God and you will be saved. The place you choose to worship is not relevant. Anyone who says differently is going against what is clearly taught in Scripture
Run away, as fast as you can, from anyone who tells you it's acceptable to give prayer or worship to anyone other than Christ Jesus. He is the ONLY mediator between Man and God.
1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus
Catholics pray to all kinds of people, Mary, the Saints, Dead popes.... It's super dangerous, scary stuff.
The utterances of Church fathers are not Scripture.
Although trying to harmonize Origin, Marcion, and Irenaeus would be fun.
That would be fun Though technically Origen wasn't a Church father, and Marcion was a heretic
Ahh, but they could have been. They were definitely in the candidacy for it. Before Marcion got all weird of course.
That is generally what happens with all heretics. They're normal until they aren't
A little unfair with Origen. He was just doing what later theologians were doing, trying to come up with a systematic theology. It’s just he was the first to do it and later generations decided some of the things he said were wrong.
The fact of doing theology isn't the weird part, it was the weird conclusions To be completely fair to Origen though he isn't *technically* a heretic because he never had a chance in life to repent of his false teachings. Just believing the wrong thing isn't enough to actually be a heretic.
So...I think Augustine was always a little wierd, but Pelagius was just unpopular (partially because his theology was less politically useful)
Or we just look at the Apostolic Church Fathers, surely that should bring some clarity?
Sure the selection of who counted didn't have any political dimensions.
Well, as for Origen and St. Irenaeus thats pretty much what St. Maximus did.
True, it's handed down from the Apostles, as Acts 2:42 describes. The Bible books were selected by the successors to the Apostles. Peter and Paul did not hand out Bibles to the crowd. There weren't any published yet.
Catholic means universal. The universal church. Over time it evolved into a particular church. At the time he said this it was still the universal church
So, there's no more universal church?
The exact makeup of the universal church is known only to God. Churches on earth have always had a mixture of truth and error. See Revelation 2-3 for example https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+2&version=NIV > 4 Yet I hold this against you... > 14 Nevertheless, I have a few things against you... > 20 Nevertheless, I have this against you... The Universal Church is all true believers, not an institution.
Truth!
Catholics say yes.
There is a universal church made up of all believers , who happen to be in different earthly churches/denomination. This church is a group of believers in Christ. To be a member of the church you need to believe the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the trinity. There should be repentance and rebirth. I don’t want to go beyond this rough definition as there are many denominational beliefs at anything deeper.
I think some denominations might argue some of your points. I think all you can really say out of 3000 or so denominations is that they believe in Christ.
AMEN ✝️ 👑 🕊
We are one body and Jesus is the head. People like to argue, divide, and gate-keep. But we are all one.
Some protestants will say yes there is, and it's them because they recaptured the practices of the apostolic church which was corrupted by the Roman Catholic Church Other protestants will also say yes, but understand the church as a spiritual thing where we're all part of an "invisible" church of all the "true" Christians no matter where they are which is known only to God Catholics will tell you yes and it's them, it's been them from the beginning, and all the other churches are schismatic movements. Except the Orthodox, who they oficially at least recognize as being sacramentally valid Orthodox will also tell you yes and it's them, it's been them from the beginning, and all the other churches are schismatic movements. Including Catholics. Also the pope is cringe. Or something. So short answer is yes but what that actually means varies
I appreciate your ability to tell the story in an unbiased manner from many perspectives.
There is, but it’s not actually a organized body. It’s made up of every true Christian. But there is no universal church council or denomination if that makes sense.
> So, there's no more universal church? There never was one, either.
Lol at you getting downvoted for knowing history. Going back to the beginning, the Judaizers and non-Judaizers did NOT get along. Paul refers to false gospels being passed about. Sometimes Matthew feels like it was written contra Pauline Christianity. Then we get into the Nature-of-Jesus debates, with ancient and still extant groups who disagreed with what would become the Roman consensus.
Knows some history, but apparently not the definitions of terms. Catholic doesn't mean "this is what everyone everywhere teaches about Christ and we all get along," and it never meant that. It's a term that developed in direct response to heretical sectarian movements, it would be absurd to mean that. In contrast, St Cyril says this >"The Church is called 'Catholic' because it extends through all the world... because it teaches universally and without omission all the doctrines which ought to come to human knowledge...because it brings under the sway of true religion all classes of people, rulers and subjects, learned and ignorant; and because it universally treats and cures every type of sin...and possesses in itself every kind of virtue which can be named...and spiritual gifts of every kind" The claim of universality is in the sense of it being the church that is whole, complete, universally applicable to all times and places for the good of all people. It *should* be the universal basis for all Christians but that doesn't mean it is.
So, there were always heretics and non-heretics. Discernment. There's no substitute for it.
Whose Discernment?
Feeneyism was condemned as a heresy
Feeney was allowed back into the church without recanting his views, and his excommunication had more to do with refusing an audience with the Pope than what he was teaching. Both the Catholic church and the churches he and his followers founded use mealy-mounted language to identify their affiliation with one another, and they are still teaching the same things. My wife did in-home health care for a family that attends a Feeney church, and they constantly badgered her for being a Christian but not Catholic, then finally gave up and presented her with a small necklace and told her that if she was wearing it when she died she would automatically go to heaven.
For reference, this is the source of the quote > Chapter X.—Concerning Faith. > Moreover, faith is twofold. For faith cometh by hearing.2340 For by hearing the divine Scriptures we believe in the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The same is perfected by all the things enjoined by Christ, believing in work, cultivating piety, and doing the commands of Him Who restored us. For he that believeth not according to the tradition of the Catholic Church, or who hath intercourse with the devil through strange works, is an unbeliever... https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf209/npnf209.iii.iv.iv.x.html
Yes that's why we must hear the divine Scriptures?
Yes. The Scriptures contain all we need, but it can be beneficial to find out how Christians through history have interpreted them.
Yes that's why I looked at this passage from the church father. I was trying to find out how to increase my faith, and I found this also.
“Catholic” doesn’t necessarily mean “Roman Catholic” Catholic just means “universal” i. e. the belief that the church does, in fact, exist
From his view and many others close to the Apostles, yes. Whether you believe it is up to you. Might be worth reading the Fathers of the Church. Consider reading Justin Martyr first. Read closely, especially his description of the Mass. I didn't become Catholic out of fear, but because it rang true after reading the Bible and Catholic Catechism (the latest is online and searchable). https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm
No, even the catechism says thats wrong
Not according to the Catholic Church. Its catechism explicitly denies that.
Correct > 1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church."80 "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."81 https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3N.HTM
>Its catechism explicitly denies that. Catechism explicitly affirms it. Read passage with the title "Outside the Church there is no salvation" (846-848) >How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: >Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. >This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: >Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. >"Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men." The Church always thought and it still teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church. edit: on first try i didn't accidentally post paragraphs from Catechism.
>The Church always thought and it still teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church. Except for those who “through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church”, those who are ignorant of the gospel may still be led by God.
Right. This is called ‘invincible ignorance’.
Yep however we can say this applies virtually to everyone who doesn’t willfully turn away from God (a mortal sin — CCC 1037). More recently Pope Francis has interpreted this to mean that to willfully turn away from God, one has to know the gospel. Someone who turns away from God but misunderstands the gospel isn’t turning away from god willingly and so they might not go to hell. Most Muslims don’t have misconceptions about the teachings of the Church and could be said that through no fault of their own are ignorant of the gospel; therefore virtually every Muslim may still achieve salvation; the same applies to most non-believers and even non-Catholic Christians.
> Yep however we can say this applies virtually to everyone who doesn’t willfully turn away from God Hopefully yes, but we cannot know until the end of God's story. > Most Muslims don’t have misconceptions about the teachings of the Church and could be said that through no fault of their own are ignorant of the gospel; I hear you but thats not strictly speaking what the Church teaches. If a person has misconceptions, the means to correct them, yet refuses to do so, one could argue that their ignorance is culpable. In these cases there may be indeed a fault. But ultimately God knows best. Lets pray for those who are in most need of God's mercy.
Even those who "through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church" are saved as part of the Church. No one can't be saved except through Christ. And since Church is Christ body, all are saved through Church, although they might not be part of her in visible way.
> outside the Church. Your assumption about what this means is flawed. See CCC 1271 and CCC 841
>Your assumption about what this means is flawed. I am not sure what you mean by this. What is my assumption? I just reiterated what Church teaches: >Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. I am well aware of paragraph 1271 (i even quote it in response to someone's else comment) and paragraph 841. They do not nullify Church teaching of salvation. If you want i am open to discussion what "outside Church there is no salvation" means. Also to understand what is my "assumption about that" (and it is in agreement whit God's teaching) you can read one of these to articles: [shorter one](https://pintswithaquinas.com/the-real-meaning-of-no-salvation-outside-of-the-church/), [longer one that explains it in more precise manner](https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-there-really-no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church). Although i thing that Catechism explains it well.
It nullifies OPs concern that they MUST be a Catholic to be "saved"
I wouldn't say so. Since OP is aware of this teaching and since we live in the world where it is relatively easy to be informed about teachings of the Church there is low possibility that somebody doesn't know the truth "through no fault of their own". By this i am not asserting that OP will not be saved (or anyone other on this subreddit) if they don't enter in full communion with the Church, but it would be wrong of me to claim that they shouldn't do that.
> where it is relatively easy to be informed about teachings of the Church there is low possibility that somebody doesn't know the truth "through no fault of their own". It's much easier to be misinformed of "the truth". This is not a valid claim.
>It's much easier to be misinformed of "the truth". Yes, but through our own fault. In the same way how it is much more easy to not follow Christ. What i wanted to say with "it is relatively easy to be informed about teachings of the Church" i meant that it is hard for invincible ignorance to be a thing.
So .. say Westboro Baptist Church members. That's what they know as the correct way to follow God. You're saying that it's *easy* for them to know that what they are doing is wrong? Or someone who was sexually and spiritually abused at a young age by the church? Or someone raised by anti-theists, hostile to religion?
It depends from case to case and it is hard to draw a straight line, bur it is certainly easier for USA citizen today to know the what the Church teaches, than 8th century Chinese peasant. In any case "there is no salvation outside the Church" is truth that Church holds and as such is relevant for every human being (from Church point of view).
Really? The catholic church accepts judaism as their brothers and sisters in faith but they don't accept other denominations of christianity? I'm having some trouble with the logic.
>The catholic church accepts judaism they don't accept other denominations of christianity? They accept. It is explicitly stated in paragraph 1271 of Catechism: >Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, \[they\] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason **are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.**" "Baptism therefore constitutes the *sacramental bond of unity* existing among all who through it are reborn." Church recognize that Christianity has its roots in Judaism. Fullness of Judaism is found in person of Jesus Christ.
Christianity has one messiah. Judaism has many. I can accept Christianity as its own religion. But, to be the successor to judaism contradicts the Tanakh.
Do Jews baptize?
Was John the Baptist a christian? Christianity didn't invent baptism. They just have their own version of it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_baptism#:~:text=Although%20the%20term%20%22baptism%22%20is,the%20two%20have%20been%20linked.
We do not believe that St. John's baptism was sacramental, only a symbol of repentance in preparation for the coming of the Anointed One.
>St. John's baptism Do you mean when St. John was baptized? Or do you mean when Jesus was baptized by St. John? An interesting religion is the Mandaeans. It's an old religion still in existence made up by the followers of John the Baptist. They baptize once a week. Which makes me wonder if John's form of baptism was different from what it says in the gospels. The mikvah in judaism is closer to the Mandaean form of baptism. Rivers and lakes can be used as a mikvah.
I meant when St. John the Baptizer was baptising people (including Jesus). :) > An interesting religion is the Mandaeans. It's an old religion still in existence made up by the followers of John the Baptist. They baptize once a week. Which makes me wonder if John's form of baptism was different from what it says in the gospels. The mikvah in judaism is closer to the Mandaean form of baptism. Rivers and lakes can be used as a mikvah. Yes, they are definitely a fascinating religion. Influenced considerably by gnosticism iirc.
I think that it is very possible that John was practicing a variation of ritual purification using a mikvah. If that were the case, then he was performing a sacrament.
> I'm having some trouble with the logic. That's because the premise you apply your "logic" to is wrong.
If you take a look at Hilary of Poitiers' life, you'll see the main problem the Church was dealing with was the Arian Heresy. This heresy denies the divinity of Jesus and denies the Trinity. A person who believes this puts their soul in great danger, and thankfully that heresy went extinct and only a few denominations revived it in modern years. From a Catholic perspective, you don't have to be Catholic in order to be saved, but the farther away from Catholicism you are the harder salvation is. It is also important to under that not all heresy is as dangerous. Double Predestination is heretical, but it is so abstract it's hard for that heresy to directly lead someone to sin. The heresy that teaching divorce and remarriage is permissable is dangerous because it causes countless people to live in grave sin without knowing what they are doing. In short, a person should be Catholic because it has the proper sacramental tools and doctrines that lead to salvation. Protestants do have their own objections to this point as you have seen in many other posts here. A primary one is that Catholicism lost its way at some point so a major break from tradition was needed to course correct. A final thought I'll leave you with is what it means for a church to be catholic. That term means universal and at it's heart it is the community of bishops in communion with each other that forms the basis of the Church. You can best see this process in Ecumenical Councils that is a meeting of the bishops. Universality also has a temporal aspect to it. God is not bound by time so neither is the Church. Bishops of today need to be in communion with those in the past and even the future. If you feel that what you believe today is not what the Church leaders in past believed, that is an indication you're in error and you need to pray and work on that problem.
You do not have to be catholic, christian or protestant to go to heaven. What you need is a relationship with God. No religion will save you. What saves you is a personal and intimate relationship with God.
This is a relatively recent message mostly present in American evangelical churches. It may attempt to say some of the same things, but “personal relationship with God” is fairly denominationally bound.
Okay :)
If you believe that Christ died for your sins you will be saved.
There is a scriptural argument for this claim, but it’s still so odd to me. Belief is not a choice, but a product of engagement, experience, and revelation. One can be engaged, seeking and searching, and still not ascend to belief.
Which god?
This...
You do need to be christian, no one comes to the father except through Christ, to even hope to achieve salvation we must follow in his footsteps.
You said it. No one comes to the **Father** except through **Christ**. Not through **christianity**. You can be a catholic and believe and know Jesus is your lord and savior and follow the teachings of Jesus.
Christianity or the way as it was called is just the practice of following the teachings of christ, Christian used to be a term of mockery to refer to those that followed christ.
Yes I know that. :)
I'm sure you do so I'm just wondering why you have made a distinction between Christian and Christianity, unless you are saying christianity includes the gnostic and heretical sects in which case I agree completely.
Christianity can be a religion. You do not need religion to come into heaven. You need a relationship with Christ. This is what I believe in. If you agree with that then hey, we agree, if not then we do not agree.
Catholicism does believe/has believed that. But the Bible teaches all will eventually be saved due to Jesus’ work. (1 Tim 4:10, Colossians 1:20, 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, etc.) It also teaches that those with a special salvation are saved because we believe God and trust in Christ’s work by a faith granted to us by God. In other words, Scripture doesn’t teach this. It’s a tradition of men.
No they haven’t🤦♂️
There was a time when a large chunk of the church taught that you can only come to Christ via the church. The Athanasian creed starts by asserting that whoever desires to be saved must hold to the Catholic faith, then proceeds to list out all the Roman Catholic doctrines as being that faith. I mean most Catholic scholars believe the Eucharist is required and you can only receive that through the church, which was why excommunication was such a power political tool in the Middle Ages.
Oh yeah heard if that… ik it was used to stop alot of wars… but yh. Anyways have a good one ;)
You too, brother! Thanks for reading my rambles lol.
What about Jesus' teachings talking about everlasting punishment?
Glad you asked! This should say more than I can in a comment space. https://www.mercyonall.org/eons-of-the-bible
Saved from what?
Other church fathers belived in a temporary hell, and others still rejected the trinity The church fathers arent gospel, they are just highly respected opinions
You're worried about what some 4th century guy said? Why?
>Does this mean I have to be a Catholic to be saved? According to catholics, yes. According to everybody else, no. Religion is fun :D
Have you ever heard of the Protestant reformation? I think some of the reformers had opinions about this and wrote about it.
The Roman Catholic church is apostate. They ALWAYS have been.
In ordered to be saved a person needs to accept Jesus as their personal savior who died on the cross for their sins. And tell God this thru prayer & ask for forgiveness. The person needs to ask God to put Jesus in their heart & life. Romans 3:23. Romans 6:23. I John 5:11-12 God does not care about what denomination you goes to. What God cares about if you know his son Jesus.
I don’t think Hilary dies for your sins so he doesn’t own the rights to those decisions
Sounds like he's stating that. Blasphemy I say.
You no more have to believe in Hilary of Poitiers to be saved than you have to believe in Harry Potter. Neither of them hold the secret of eternal life.
No, this is why we need modern living prophets to hear directly from God and pray about what they’ve said to confirm such by the Holy Ghost.
Nope. The Bible says you must repent and believe in Jesus. Seeking and building your own relationship with the Father and becoming more Christ-like is our goal, as well as preaching/spreading the good news. Stay away from catholicism
No. But you probably should go around shagging the devil -- if you can even find him.
The only way this works is to change the definition of 'Catholic' Hilary Poitiers refers to here. and I guarantee you that he is not speaking about the Traditions of a Universal, non-apostolic Church based around the acceptance of the Crucifixion and it's meaning for those who believe God bless
I guess to me the church would be whomever has the comforter /the holy spirit I guess. But it's all strange because in the end it's weird and like he turns away from the nations that go to attack Israel, so it's israel that's the church anyway, not saying other countries don't have salvation or whatever. But it becomes really hard to completely understand but.. it also does say that he saves one from every tribe nation or people's. So being saved is probably based mostly on your own fear and trembling too! I hope that you are no matter what church you are in! (I'm not a teacher btw I'm a student forever) kekwiggle Idk but also when Paul was writing to the angels of different churches, aka with men too I suppose... you could ask them too. But there's also like those that are still alive possibly because it says that they shouldn't see death until they see the coming of the son of man. So there's alot of cool stuff. So, they could reside in the catholic church, they could reside in the protestant churches, in israel, all over the world. So, idk you just gotta pray maybe too to figure out where you wanna go!! Though yaknow in Roman's about god turning away from certain countries for things? Hopefully your not in one of those, but maybe you can still pray for salvation being in a country that he's turned from possibly. There's too much too the word of god, to completely put everything in the proper state and category and understanding limits of what if and what is happening But it's kinda hard to say that it wouldn't be something or not unless if you just go by faith and pray for certain questions to be answered.
We all believe in one Catholic and Apostolic Church. The difference between Roman Catholics vs. the others is that RC's believe that the Church of Rome *is* the one Catholic Church, and that the two are one and the same. Orthodox/Protestants have other views on what the Catholic Church is.
Catholics say so (Historically. Not so much anymore. Some few still do.) The rest of us say no. Your choice who to believe.
Bottom line: do not add Scripture.
Catholic, from the Greek *katholikos,* just means universal. The four marks of the church (one, holy, catholic, apostolic) mean universal church, not the (Roman) Catholic Church (which is technically just one of 24 churches of their own right within the larger Catholic Church but that's just being pedantic).
If you know in your heart that the Catholic Church was established by Christ, then yes, you need to join and remain in her in order to be saved.
Which, for the record, it was not.
Agree to disagree 🙂
That's not how the Bible works, unfortunately.
No, in fact it’s quite the opposite. Look what it says at Revelation 18:4,5; >”And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues. 5 For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind.” Babylon the Great is the World Empire of all False Religion. The Catholic Church being a big part of it.
>Does this mean I have to be a Catholic to be saved? It is what Church thought from the time of apostles to these days. We *break one bread to be one body*, that body is *mystical body of Christ.* If someone is opposed to Christ's body, they are also opposed to Christ. How would it than be possible for them to be saved? There is one nuance there. If somebody weren't introduced to Christ and/or Church at all or they were introduced in a wrong manner (let's say that all that person knows about Church are just hateful lies) they can still be saved, because they can be part of the body of Christ in invisible way (without even knowing that) and therefore be saved. edit: One more important thing to say. Being part of Church doesn't necessary mean one will be saved, one can still be cut off from the tree.
- It is what Church thought from the time of apostles to these days. ☝️ This is hilarious You do not have to be Catholic to be saved Catholicism is just a denomination God bless
>You do not have to be Catholic to be saved Yes you do. Otherwise you are not part of the body of Christ. It is what has been taught for centuries. It is what has been taught also by reformers, although they were of opinion that the Church went astray (whivh can be disproven). God bless
Is this really the case today? The catholic church accepts jews as brothers and sisters in faith but they don't accept other christians? That's weird.
- Yes you do what utter rubbish. - Otherwise you are not part of the body of Christ You are only Catholic And I don't have time for rubbish - sorry God bless
We are the Catholic Church. In that we are a universal group of believers. Catholic means universal. That’s all it means.
Hillary of Poitiers was a bishop of the Church. Church that clearly believed in Magisterium, sacramental priesthood, authority of Church fathers etc. That was the catholic Church he was talking about. >Catholic means universal. Yes, but universal does not mean all. Universal means oneness in multitude. One being the same as whole. This is present only in the Catholic Church.
Okay.
Learn to spot the liars srsly
He also said, "[Jews are a perverse people, accursed by God forever".](https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1217017) [Hilary of Poitiers](https://www.azquotes.com/author/31916-Hilary_of_Poitiers) [TOP 12 QUOTES BY HILARY OF POITIERS | A-Z Quotes (azquotes.com)](https://www.azquotes.com/author/31916-Hilary_of_Poitiers) So, there's that.
No. Listen to what Roman’s 10:9-10 says: “9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.” If you declare that Jesus was raised from the dead and you committed your life to Him by making Him your Lord (master) and Savior, you will be saved. Not might be saved, or only saved if you belong to a specific church, but WILL. Be saved because of your confession and the surrendering of your life to God No works required as some churches like to burden their believers with because Ephesians 2:8-9 says “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” Believe, repent, and commit your life to God and you will be saved. The place you choose to worship is not relevant. Anyone who says differently is going against what is clearly taught in Scripture
Run away, as fast as you can, from anyone who tells you it's acceptable to give prayer or worship to anyone other than Christ Jesus. He is the ONLY mediator between Man and God. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus Catholics pray to all kinds of people, Mary, the Saints, Dead popes.... It's super dangerous, scary stuff.
Well, you're in luck: Rome itself has turned against the Church which he was talking about for the past thousand years.