Pope John Paul II released the "Third Secret of Fatima" in 2000 A.D. What is It?
Dec 12, 2018 00:17:57 #
Karpenter,
Being the Devils advocate on Mary (humor), check out the "Differences vs the Similarities" in regards to Mary and Protestantism, below . . .
Karpenter, We have 1,987 years Catholic Church History, through antiquity, Traditions and Oral Traditions out side of the Bible.
Most Protestant break-off sectarian Protestant Denominations, have Less than a 100 year Church History or traditions.
They can't agreeing anything, . . . Thus there is no unity and you Protestant's have 30,000 plus sectarian schismatic divisional Churches.
Luther started it all, "They throughout the baby with the bath-water."
Since you think you know what Catholic think doctrinally, check this website and URL link and learn what Mary the Mother of God is all about.
It might even change your Protestant Mind . . .
Just Praying, and asking Mary's intercessory help when she ask's her Son Jesus's, to answer your thoughts, for your doubt.
Every thing Mary
https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/j/jewish-identity-of-mary.php
1. Differences in the Christian Understanding of Mary
– Answered by Father Johann Roten, S.M.
Q: Why are there differences between Christian denominations regarding Mary?
A: There is a difference between Christian denominations as regards to Mary for a number of reasons:
Need to mark difference: Protestantism for centuries marked its difference with Catholicism mainly by opposing strong (and sometimes exaggerated) Marian devotion.
Insistence on Jesus Christ as sole mediator accepted by all Christian denominations but interpreted differently.
Importance of personal participation in salvation with works and help of others (saints) in some denominations (Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans) vs. "faith alone" as the only and "unilateral" act through which God saves (Protestant denominations).
Strictly Bible-related concept of Christianity (Protestantism) vs. the understanding of Christianity based on Scripture and Tradition (meaning the reading and interpretation of the Church as Christ's own institution) in Catholicism. The latter allows for a greater adaptation to historical and personal situations and needs.
A concept of God which stresses his role as judge (Protestantism) vs. a more compassionate God (Catholicism). The latter allows for a more generous place for Mary.
A more sober, severe, abstract, auditive religion (Protestantism) vs. a more visual, popular, feminine and person-oriented religion (Catholicism).
All of these explanations are generalizations. There are many shades and nuances in the actual practices of the various denominations. It is sometimes difficult to know what non-Catholic denominations practice given the broad range of personal interpretations.
2. Christian Understandings of Mary: Similarities
Q: With all the ghosts in upbringing, how do people of differing Christian faiths come to a common insight on Mary?
A: Speaking of the ghosts of our respective religious upbringing only, there are Protestant ghosts and there are Catholic ghosts. There are ghosts for every churchgoer. If some have a tendency to negate Mary, others may have indulged in exaggerating her role and place. So we all have to fight our ghosts.
The image of Mary as presented by the Catholic Church has many facets. It is biblical, liturgical, doctrinal, devotional and cultural. All of these aspects should come together. The isolated cultural image is deceptive; it may disguise Mary as fertility goddess. But so is the isolated biblical image, if it reduces Mary to a purely semantic datum. However, any initiation to a more comprehensive view of Mary has to begin with the psychological affinities of the person who seeks initiation.
Given a Protestant background, it would seem possible to highlight two aspects of Mary's life:
1) her special place in God's plan of salvation as Jesus' mother
2) her religious existence based on faith and grace only.
These two aspects of Mary's spiritual profile are common to Catholics and Protestants, in general. A Christian can identify with Mary's special call and faith existence. Such a call is unique to each baptized person. If we see Mary in this light most of us probably will be able to develop--over time--a new solidarity with Mary. From these roots other strands of Marian devotion may develop. It remains crucial that whatever we feel for Mary it lead us to Christ and never separate us from the Church.
In order to achieve these objectives it could be useful to find out more about a person's psychological affinities with the person of Mary. Does the person relate to Mary-disciple, Mary-mother, Mary-associate of Christ, Mary-model...? All of these aspects and more are contained in the figure of Mary.
From an immediately practical point of view the familiarization with Mary's biblical image could be very helpful. Here is the reference of a recent work about Mary in the New Testament: Mary of Galilee: Mary in the New Testament, by Bertrand Buby, Alba House, 1994. Fr. Buby is one of our scholars in residence.
Being the Devils advocate on Mary (humor), check out the "Differences vs the Similarities" in regards to Mary and Protestantism, below . . .
Karpenter, We have 1,987 years Catholic Church History, through antiquity, Traditions and Oral Traditions out side of the Bible.
Most Protestant break-off sectarian Protestant Denominations, have Less than a 100 year Church History or traditions.
They can't agreeing anything, . . . Thus there is no unity and you Protestant's have 30,000 plus sectarian schismatic divisional Churches.
Luther started it all, "They throughout the baby with the bath-water."
Since you think you know what Catholic think doctrinally, check this website and URL link and learn what Mary the Mother of God is all about.
It might even change your Protestant Mind . . .
Just Praying, and asking Mary's intercessory help when she ask's her Son Jesus's, to answer your thoughts, for your doubt.
Every thing Mary
https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/j/jewish-identity-of-mary.php
1. Differences in the Christian Understanding of Mary
– Answered by Father Johann Roten, S.M.
Q: Why are there differences between Christian denominations regarding Mary?
A: There is a difference between Christian denominations as regards to Mary for a number of reasons:
Need to mark difference: Protestantism for centuries marked its difference with Catholicism mainly by opposing strong (and sometimes exaggerated) Marian devotion.
Insistence on Jesus Christ as sole mediator accepted by all Christian denominations but interpreted differently.
Importance of personal participation in salvation with works and help of others (saints) in some denominations (Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans) vs. "faith alone" as the only and "unilateral" act through which God saves (Protestant denominations).
Strictly Bible-related concept of Christianity (Protestantism) vs. the understanding of Christianity based on Scripture and Tradition (meaning the reading and interpretation of the Church as Christ's own institution) in Catholicism. The latter allows for a greater adaptation to historical and personal situations and needs.
A concept of God which stresses his role as judge (Protestantism) vs. a more compassionate God (Catholicism). The latter allows for a more generous place for Mary.
A more sober, severe, abstract, auditive religion (Protestantism) vs. a more visual, popular, feminine and person-oriented religion (Catholicism).
All of these explanations are generalizations. There are many shades and nuances in the actual practices of the various denominations. It is sometimes difficult to know what non-Catholic denominations practice given the broad range of personal interpretations.
2. Christian Understandings of Mary: Similarities
Q: With all the ghosts in upbringing, how do people of differing Christian faiths come to a common insight on Mary?
A: Speaking of the ghosts of our respective religious upbringing only, there are Protestant ghosts and there are Catholic ghosts. There are ghosts for every churchgoer. If some have a tendency to negate Mary, others may have indulged in exaggerating her role and place. So we all have to fight our ghosts.
The image of Mary as presented by the Catholic Church has many facets. It is biblical, liturgical, doctrinal, devotional and cultural. All of these aspects should come together. The isolated cultural image is deceptive; it may disguise Mary as fertility goddess. But so is the isolated biblical image, if it reduces Mary to a purely semantic datum. However, any initiation to a more comprehensive view of Mary has to begin with the psychological affinities of the person who seeks initiation.
Given a Protestant background, it would seem possible to highlight two aspects of Mary's life:
1) her special place in God's plan of salvation as Jesus' mother
2) her religious existence based on faith and grace only.
These two aspects of Mary's spiritual profile are common to Catholics and Protestants, in general. A Christian can identify with Mary's special call and faith existence. Such a call is unique to each baptized person. If we see Mary in this light most of us probably will be able to develop--over time--a new solidarity with Mary. From these roots other strands of Marian devotion may develop. It remains crucial that whatever we feel for Mary it lead us to Christ and never separate us from the Church.
In order to achieve these objectives it could be useful to find out more about a person's psychological affinities with the person of Mary. Does the person relate to Mary-disciple, Mary-mother, Mary-associate of Christ, Mary-model...? All of these aspects and more are contained in the figure of Mary.
From an immediately practical point of view the familiarization with Mary's biblical image could be very helpful. Here is the reference of a recent work about Mary in the New Testament: Mary of Galilee: Mary in the New Testament, by Bertrand Buby, Alba House, 1994. Fr. Buby is one of our scholars in residence.
karpenter wrote:
br br I'm Sure All This Dogma Is The Faith For C... (show quote)
Dec 12, 2018 07:21:47 #
Traditions Of Men Is Scorned Upon
And Warned Against
There Is No Such Thing
As The Spirits If Formerly Living Things
Shadow Entities And Ghosts Are All Demonic In Origin
This Was Put Very Well In Previous Postings
Mary Has No Power Of Salvation Or Intercession Of Prayers
That Is Christ's Place Alone
How Many Times Does Biblical Scripture Have To Tell Us That ??
As Far As Being Jesus' Mother, Someone Had To Be Picked
Most Of The Grace References Seem Like Literary Rhapsody
That She Was Blessed Because She Was Picked
Not The Other Way Around, Like Job In His Trials
Moses Was A Murderer
Nothing Says He Was Devout At All
Yet, He Was Picked
Like Jonah, He Tried To Get Out Of It
And Like Jonah, He Was Going To Do The Job
Because God Said So
No One Prays To Moses, Or Elijah
As Far As Not Being Deified
Praying To Mary Is Praying To Mary
My Wife Prays To Bridget All The Time
It's A Pantheon God Tradition From Antiquity
So You're Still Presenting
liturgical, doctrinal, devotional and cultural
Like Someone's Rationale And Councils Can Bring Into Existence
Something That Just Is Not There
Nothing Biblical
From Jesus, The Apostles, Or From Any Letters
These Are Rituals And Traditions Incorporated Into The Church
To Make Conversion More Palpable To The Heathen Masses
When It Was Made The State Religion Of The Empire
Take Pagan Holidays And A Heathen Pantheon Tradition
Slap God, Jesus And Saints On It
We'll Need A Woman For Those Other Folks
Another Forbidden Thing From The Beginning
(Israel Had A Civil War Over It)
And Presto -- We'll All Get Along
Yet Scripture Forbids Doing Just That
Because Of The Atrocities Committed By Pagans
To Their Spirits, Stars, Trees, And Rocks
And Warned Against
There Is No Such Thing
As The Spirits If Formerly Living Things
Shadow Entities And Ghosts Are All Demonic In Origin
This Was Put Very Well In Previous Postings
Mary Has No Power Of Salvation Or Intercession Of Prayers
That Is Christ's Place Alone
How Many Times Does Biblical Scripture Have To Tell Us That ??
As Far As Being Jesus' Mother, Someone Had To Be Picked
Most Of The Grace References Seem Like Literary Rhapsody
That She Was Blessed Because She Was Picked
Not The Other Way Around, Like Job In His Trials
Moses Was A Murderer
Nothing Says He Was Devout At All
Yet, He Was Picked
Like Jonah, He Tried To Get Out Of It
And Like Jonah, He Was Going To Do The Job
Because God Said So
No One Prays To Moses, Or Elijah
As Far As Not Being Deified
Praying To Mary Is Praying To Mary
My Wife Prays To Bridget All The Time
It's A Pantheon God Tradition From Antiquity
So You're Still Presenting
liturgical, doctrinal, devotional and cultural
Like Someone's Rationale And Councils Can Bring Into Existence
Something That Just Is Not There
Nothing Biblical
From Jesus, The Apostles, Or From Any Letters
These Are Rituals And Traditions Incorporated Into The Church
To Make Conversion More Palpable To The Heathen Masses
When It Was Made The State Religion Of The Empire
Take Pagan Holidays And A Heathen Pantheon Tradition
Slap God, Jesus And Saints On It
We'll Need A Woman For Those Other Folks
Another Forbidden Thing From The Beginning
(Israel Had A Civil War Over It)
And Presto -- We'll All Get Along
Yet Scripture Forbids Doing Just That
Because Of The Atrocities Committed By Pagans
To Their Spirits, Stars, Trees, And Rocks
Dec 12, 2018 08:21:28 #
There Is No Direct Biblical Scripture
Naming Mary In Her After-Life Station
This Is All Post-Constantine Tradition
By The Dates Listed
Naming Mary In Her After-Life Station
This Is All Post-Constantine Tradition
By The Dates Listed
Dec 12, 2018 09:45:38 #
karpenter wrote:
There Is No Direct Biblical Scripture
Naming Mary In Her After-Life Station
This Is All Post-Constantine Tradition
By The Dates Listed
Naming Mary In Her After-Life Station
This Is All Post-Constantine Tradition
By The Dates Listed
Amen and Amen
Dec 12, 2018 10:56:55 #
I Mentioned Deviations Were Introduced By Roman Councils
Precipitating The Split Into East And West
And Caused The Rise Of Protestantism
You Guys Said I Was Full Of It
Yet Here You Are Citing Those Very Councils As Proof
They Mulled It Over,
Voted Which Opinions Of Theirs
Would Be Declared Infallible Truth From Then On
No More Council Debate Team Results, Thank-You
Unbiased Plain Language Scripture Alone Will Do Just Fine
Precipitating The Split Into East And West
And Caused The Rise Of Protestantism
You Guys Said I Was Full Of It
Yet Here You Are Citing Those Very Councils As Proof
They Mulled It Over,
Voted Which Opinions Of Theirs
Would Be Declared Infallible Truth From Then On
No More Council Debate Team Results, Thank-You
Unbiased Plain Language Scripture Alone Will Do Just Fine
Dec 12, 2018 23:08:03 #
Karpenter,
The man on the OPP religious forum who passes, then fully retracted his statements on the Marian Fatima apparitions . . .
There is no deviations what Jesus Christ taught, the Apostles taught, the Early Church taught, the Catholic Church Councils taught, the Pope's, the Bishop's, The Cardinal's, The Priest's, The Deacon's, The Friar's-Brothers, the Nun'-Sisters, the Church Theologians-Philosophers and the Church laity.
Example: the doctrine of the Trinity, the Doctrine of Purgatory, the Immaculate Conception of Mary. ect.
These doctrines are just further flowering of mustard seeds, and 1,987 years of Church Doctrines and growth.
Karpenter, you call these deviations, I call this a Non-Sequitur fallacies and diversion from the Real Truth that Protestants reject.
To be deep in history, is to cease to be Protestant.
Venerable Cardinal John Henry Newman, former Anglican, covert to Catholicism
Hummmmmm. . . . And the many errors of a man-made dead, doctrine of Sola Scriptura e.g. "The Bible Alone."
A doctrine man-Made by Martin Luther, who wanted anarchy in the Catholic Church, and developed his one theology biblical doctrine, to have independent of Church authority biblical self-interpreting 30,000 thousand protestant little Pope's.
Be careful what Martin Luther wished for, Pandora's box is now open and there is up-ward of 47,000 thousand schismatic, sectarian, divisional Churches world wide.
Doc110
The man on the OPP religious forum who passes, then fully retracted his statements on the Marian Fatima apparitions . . .
There is no deviations what Jesus Christ taught, the Apostles taught, the Early Church taught, the Catholic Church Councils taught, the Pope's, the Bishop's, The Cardinal's, The Priest's, The Deacon's, The Friar's-Brothers, the Nun'-Sisters, the Church Theologians-Philosophers and the Church laity.
Example: the doctrine of the Trinity, the Doctrine of Purgatory, the Immaculate Conception of Mary. ect.
These doctrines are just further flowering of mustard seeds, and 1,987 years of Church Doctrines and growth.
Karpenter, you call these deviations, I call this a Non-Sequitur fallacies and diversion from the Real Truth that Protestants reject.
To be deep in history, is to cease to be Protestant.
Venerable Cardinal John Henry Newman, former Anglican, covert to Catholicism
Hummmmmm. . . . And the many errors of a man-made dead, doctrine of Sola Scriptura e.g. "The Bible Alone."
A doctrine man-Made by Martin Luther, who wanted anarchy in the Catholic Church, and developed his one theology biblical doctrine, to have independent of Church authority biblical self-interpreting 30,000 thousand protestant little Pope's.
Be careful what Martin Luther wished for, Pandora's box is now open and there is up-ward of 47,000 thousand schismatic, sectarian, divisional Churches world wide.
Doc110
karpenter wrote:
I Mentioned Deviations Were Introduced By Roman Councils
Precipitating The Split Into East And West
And Caused The Rise Of Protestantism
You Guys Said I Was Full Of It
Yet Here You Are Citing Those Very Councils As Proof
They Mulled It Over,
Voted Which Opinions Of Theirs
Would Be Declared Infallible Truth From Then On
No More Council Debate Team Results, Thank-You
Unbiased Plain Language Scripture Alone Will Do Just Fine
I Mentioned Deviations Were Introduced By Roman Councils
Precipitating The Split Into East And West
And Caused The Rise Of Protestantism
You Guys Said I Was Full Of It
Yet Here You Are Citing Those Very Councils As Proof
They Mulled It Over,
Voted Which Opinions Of Theirs
Would Be Declared Infallible Truth From Then On
No More Council Debate Team Results, Thank-You
Unbiased Plain Language Scripture Alone Will Do Just Fine
Dec 15, 2018 10:46:05 #
Please . . . Don’t Call Protestants . . . Christians . . . They Are Heretics
Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco
It is very common today to hear Catholics call a Protestant “a Christian,” or even, “a good Christian.”
In the United States, it was already a practice before Vatican II because of the tendency of American Catholics to accommodate Protestantism, whose tonus dominated the social and business spheres.
Then, there was the question of adaptation as prominent Protestants joined the Catholic faith, or Catholics entered into marriages with Protestants.
It was just easier to call everyone “Christian.” Supposedly it underplayed differences.
It was meant to create the impression that Catholics and Protestants were cousins in one big, happy family.
Pope Leo XIII condemned this tolerance toward Protestantism under the name of Americanism, the heresy of Americanism, to be more precise.
After Vatican II, needless to say, the practice of calling Protestants Christias has snowballed, with the official conciliar documents assuming this same impropriety.
Hence, the Holy See, Prelates and priests have made its use as widespread as possible.
Accommodation to Protestantism in our days has reached such a point that some Catholics, to distinguish between Catholics and their Protestant “separated brethren,” call themselves Catholic Christians.
A redundancy if I've ever heard one.
Only Catholics can be true Christians.
No one who dissents from the Roman Catholic Church can be a Christian.
The terms are synonymous.
Every time I hear the term Christian used for Protestants, I cringe. Its usage clearly nourishes a trend toward a dangerous religious indifferentism.
Which denies the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true Catholic Religion.
It is an implicit admission that those who deny the one Faith can nonetheless be Christians, that is, be in the Church of Christ.
Inherently it leads to the progressivist notion that men can be saved in any religion that accepts Christ as Savior.
A “good Lutheran,” a “good Anglican,” a “good Presbyterian –
What does it matter so long as they are good people and sincerely love Christ?
Regardless of who is applying this usage today, I want to stress that it is at variance with the entire tradition of the Catholic Church until the Council.
To consider heretics as Christians is not the teaching of the Church.
Before Vatican II, the Magisterium was always very clear:
It is not a matter of an individual’s character or traits.
No one can be in the Church of Christ without professing the ensemble of the truths of Catholic Faith, being in unity with the Chair of Peter and receiving the same Seven Sacraments.
The only Christian is one who accepts Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church he established.
Who can have God for Father and not accept the Church for Mother? (Pope Pius IX, Singulari quidem of March 17, 1856)
Who can accept the spouse Christ, and not his mystical bride the Church?
Who can separate the Head, the only begotten Son of God, from the body, which is His Church?
(Pope Leo XIII, Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896). It is not possible.
In short, only those who profess the one Catholic Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ are members of the Church of Christ.
And only those members can legitimately bear the title of honor of Christian.
The Protestant sect started as a revolt, protesting the Church of Christ and, pretending to accept Christ without Peter, the authority He established on earth.
With this split, they left the Church and became heretics.
This used to be clearly said and understood, without sentimental fear of offending one’s neighbors or relatives:
A Protestant is a heretic because he severed himself from the Body of the Church.
He is not a Christian, and certainly not a “good Christian.”
Scriptures confirm this truth
My friend Jan thought I was being too severe on this topic.
“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” She said.
“Don’t Scriptures teach us to love our neighbor and not be judgmental?”
It is the same old post Vatican II story, claiming that it is “judgmental” to correct bad practices and false teachings and arguing with disputable interpretations of Scriptures.
Well, despite these subjective interpretations, the inspired words of Scriptures provide an unambiguous defense that the custody of the vineyard has been committed by Christ to the Catholic Church alone.
Let me quote just a few verses:
“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.
(Lk 10:16).”
It could not be clearer:
The Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.
Christ establishes one Church with a single head:
"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matt 16:19).
St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants:
“If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
(Gal 1: 9).
In another passage he instructs Catholics to remove themselves from the bad society of non-Catholics:
“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the Tradition which they have received of us.”
(2 Thess 3:6).
The Apostle St. John forbade any intercourse with heretics: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house or welcome him.”
(2 Jo 1:10)”
Holy Scriptures are clear on the point that only those who belong to the one Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church, can rightfully be considered Christians.
Popes reiterate this teaching
The traditional Papal Magisterium was also clear on this topic. Let me offer a few texts by way of exemplification.
Pius XII stated unequivocally:
“To be Christian one must be Roman.
One must recognize the oneness of Christ’s Church that is governed by one successor of the Prince of the Apostles who is the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on earth”
(Allocution to the Irish pilgrims of October 8, 1957).
How is it possible to be clearer than this about those who can be called Christian?
Leo XIII makes it plain that separated members cannot belong to the same body: “So long as the member was on the body, it lived; separated, it lost its life.
Thus the man, so long as he lives on the body of the [Catholic] Church, he is a Christian; separated from her, he becomes a heretic”
(Encyclical Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896).
Emphasizing the fate of those who break away from the one Faith, he says:
“Whoever leaves her [the Catholic Church] departs from the will and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ; leaving the path of salvation, he enters that of perdition.
Whoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress.”
(ibid.).
Certainly, they do not share with us the same title of Christian.
Pope Pius IX stated:
“He who abandons the Chair of Peter on which the Church is founded, is falsely persuaded that he is in the Church of Christ.”
(Quartus supra of January 6 1873, n. 8).
In the Syllabus of Modern Errors,
The proposition that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion was specifically condemned.
(Pius IX, n. 18)(1).
Therefore, there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church, and only those who belong to it should rightfully be called Christians.
How to fight Americanism?
Many persons ask me:
What can I do to fight Progressivism?
Others have requested:
Give me some specific examples of how I can combat Americanism.
Let me offer one concrete way to fight in yourself the tendency toward accommodation with Protestantism.
When you catch yourself calling a Protestant a “Christian,”
Stop and correct yourself.
Call him a Protestant.
It is a way to affirm that you do not accept the Protestant errors and that you acknowledge it for the terrible thing it is:
Protestants denied many Catholic dogmas and for this reason caused that first major crack in the unity of the Catholic Church that caused untold damage to Christendom and the perdition of those souls adhering to it.
It is a small thing, but by such small customs we as a people have been walking steadily toward religious indifferentism.
It is time to set some roadblocks on that path. We should not veil in ambiguous terms our love for the ensemble of the Catholic Faith.
The only true union possible for Catholics with Protestants is by their return to the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church.
Only with such a return can they rightfully call themselves Christians.
Numerous traditional Catholic teachings on the this topic can be found in Atila S. Guimarães, Aniums Delendi II, Los Angeles: TIA, 2002, pp. 205-217.
See also "Christian Ecuemnism" in Simon Galloway, No Crisis in the Church? New Olive Press, 2006, pp. 1-51.
Posted on February 6, 2007
Related Topics of Interest
The Lutheran and Calvinist Mentalities
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D015cpProtestantMentalities.htm
Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco
It is very common today to hear Catholics call a Protestant “a Christian,” or even, “a good Christian.”
In the United States, it was already a practice before Vatican II because of the tendency of American Catholics to accommodate Protestantism, whose tonus dominated the social and business spheres.
Then, there was the question of adaptation as prominent Protestants joined the Catholic faith, or Catholics entered into marriages with Protestants.
It was just easier to call everyone “Christian.” Supposedly it underplayed differences.
It was meant to create the impression that Catholics and Protestants were cousins in one big, happy family.
Pope Leo XIII condemned this tolerance toward Protestantism under the name of Americanism, the heresy of Americanism, to be more precise.
After Vatican II, needless to say, the practice of calling Protestants Christias has snowballed, with the official conciliar documents assuming this same impropriety.
Hence, the Holy See, Prelates and priests have made its use as widespread as possible.
Accommodation to Protestantism in our days has reached such a point that some Catholics, to distinguish between Catholics and their Protestant “separated brethren,” call themselves Catholic Christians.
A redundancy if I've ever heard one.
Only Catholics can be true Christians.
No one who dissents from the Roman Catholic Church can be a Christian.
The terms are synonymous.
Every time I hear the term Christian used for Protestants, I cringe. Its usage clearly nourishes a trend toward a dangerous religious indifferentism.
Which denies the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true Catholic Religion.
It is an implicit admission that those who deny the one Faith can nonetheless be Christians, that is, be in the Church of Christ.
Inherently it leads to the progressivist notion that men can be saved in any religion that accepts Christ as Savior.
A “good Lutheran,” a “good Anglican,” a “good Presbyterian –
What does it matter so long as they are good people and sincerely love Christ?
Regardless of who is applying this usage today, I want to stress that it is at variance with the entire tradition of the Catholic Church until the Council.
To consider heretics as Christians is not the teaching of the Church.
Before Vatican II, the Magisterium was always very clear:
It is not a matter of an individual’s character or traits.
No one can be in the Church of Christ without professing the ensemble of the truths of Catholic Faith, being in unity with the Chair of Peter and receiving the same Seven Sacraments.
The only Christian is one who accepts Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church he established.
Who can have God for Father and not accept the Church for Mother? (Pope Pius IX, Singulari quidem of March 17, 1856)
Who can accept the spouse Christ, and not his mystical bride the Church?
Who can separate the Head, the only begotten Son of God, from the body, which is His Church?
(Pope Leo XIII, Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896). It is not possible.
In short, only those who profess the one Catholic Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ are members of the Church of Christ.
And only those members can legitimately bear the title of honor of Christian.
The Protestant sect started as a revolt, protesting the Church of Christ and, pretending to accept Christ without Peter, the authority He established on earth.
With this split, they left the Church and became heretics.
This used to be clearly said and understood, without sentimental fear of offending one’s neighbors or relatives:
A Protestant is a heretic because he severed himself from the Body of the Church.
He is not a Christian, and certainly not a “good Christian.”
Scriptures confirm this truth
My friend Jan thought I was being too severe on this topic.
“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” She said.
“Don’t Scriptures teach us to love our neighbor and not be judgmental?”
It is the same old post Vatican II story, claiming that it is “judgmental” to correct bad practices and false teachings and arguing with disputable interpretations of Scriptures.
Well, despite these subjective interpretations, the inspired words of Scriptures provide an unambiguous defense that the custody of the vineyard has been committed by Christ to the Catholic Church alone.
Let me quote just a few verses:
“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.
(Lk 10:16).”
It could not be clearer:
The Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.
Christ establishes one Church with a single head:
"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matt 16:19).
St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants:
“If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
(Gal 1: 9).
In another passage he instructs Catholics to remove themselves from the bad society of non-Catholics:
“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the Tradition which they have received of us.”
(2 Thess 3:6).
The Apostle St. John forbade any intercourse with heretics: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house or welcome him.”
(2 Jo 1:10)”
Holy Scriptures are clear on the point that only those who belong to the one Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church, can rightfully be considered Christians.
Popes reiterate this teaching
The traditional Papal Magisterium was also clear on this topic. Let me offer a few texts by way of exemplification.
Pius XII stated unequivocally:
“To be Christian one must be Roman.
One must recognize the oneness of Christ’s Church that is governed by one successor of the Prince of the Apostles who is the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on earth”
(Allocution to the Irish pilgrims of October 8, 1957).
How is it possible to be clearer than this about those who can be called Christian?
Leo XIII makes it plain that separated members cannot belong to the same body: “So long as the member was on the body, it lived; separated, it lost its life.
Thus the man, so long as he lives on the body of the [Catholic] Church, he is a Christian; separated from her, he becomes a heretic”
(Encyclical Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896).
Emphasizing the fate of those who break away from the one Faith, he says:
“Whoever leaves her [the Catholic Church] departs from the will and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ; leaving the path of salvation, he enters that of perdition.
Whoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress.”
(ibid.).
Certainly, they do not share with us the same title of Christian.
Pope Pius IX stated:
“He who abandons the Chair of Peter on which the Church is founded, is falsely persuaded that he is in the Church of Christ.”
(Quartus supra of January 6 1873, n. 8).
In the Syllabus of Modern Errors,
The proposition that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion was specifically condemned.
(Pius IX, n. 18)(1).
Therefore, there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church, and only those who belong to it should rightfully be called Christians.
How to fight Americanism?
Many persons ask me:
What can I do to fight Progressivism?
Others have requested:
Give me some specific examples of how I can combat Americanism.
Let me offer one concrete way to fight in yourself the tendency toward accommodation with Protestantism.
When you catch yourself calling a Protestant a “Christian,”
Stop and correct yourself.
Call him a Protestant.
It is a way to affirm that you do not accept the Protestant errors and that you acknowledge it for the terrible thing it is:
Protestants denied many Catholic dogmas and for this reason caused that first major crack in the unity of the Catholic Church that caused untold damage to Christendom and the perdition of those souls adhering to it.
It is a small thing, but by such small customs we as a people have been walking steadily toward religious indifferentism.
It is time to set some roadblocks on that path. We should not veil in ambiguous terms our love for the ensemble of the Catholic Faith.
The only true union possible for Catholics with Protestants is by their return to the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church.
Only with such a return can they rightfully call themselves Christians.
Numerous traditional Catholic teachings on the this topic can be found in Atila S. Guimarães, Aniums Delendi II, Los Angeles: TIA, 2002, pp. 205-217.
See also "Christian Ecuemnism" in Simon Galloway, No Crisis in the Church? New Olive Press, 2006, pp. 1-51.
Posted on February 6, 2007
Related Topics of Interest
The Lutheran and Calvinist Mentalities
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D015cpProtestantMentalities.htm
karpenter wrote:
I Mentioned Deviations Were Introduced By Roman Councils
Precipitating The Split Into East And West
And Caused The Rise Of Protestantism
You Guys Said I Was Full Of It
Yet Here You Are Citing Those Very Councils As Proof
They Mulled It Over,
Voted Which Opinions Of Theirs
Would Be Declared Infallible Truth From Then On
No More Council Debate Team Results, Thank-You
Unbiased Plain Language Scripture Alone Will Do Just Fine
Precipitating The Split Into East And West
And Caused The Rise Of Protestantism
You Guys Said I Was Full Of It
Yet Here You Are Citing Those Very Councils As Proof
They Mulled It Over,
Voted Which Opinions Of Theirs
Would Be Declared Infallible Truth From Then On
No More Council Debate Team Results, Thank-You
Unbiased Plain Language Scripture Alone Will Do Just Fine
Dec 17, 2018 15:54:03 #
Zemirah wrote:
One does not honor their parents by bowing or knee... (show quote)
This is something we all need to keep in mind.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.