Churches back plan to unite under Pope

Not a big deal. Some Eastern Orthodox denominations, like the Ukranian Church, did that. They kept their own liturgy and discipline. It will change very little in the Anglican church, although it might have a larger effect on the Roman Catholic church, if it goes through.

 

Two of a kind.

"When you got nothin', you got nothin' to lose" (Dylan).

 

Maybe its not a big deal if its not happening in your country.

And to liken the Ukranian Orthodox to the Anglican church is not a true comparison.

Remember, the UK government is still impacted by its Bishops etc, to a very small degree perhaps, but it is there.

I see this as a way for the Pope to exert his influence even more.

 

I pray that this will lead the anglicans to eliminate their gay priests . . .

 

I doubt if the Anglican Church has that much influence in the UK these days. And as I noted, the day-to-day life of the Ukranian Church changed little if at all.

If Anglicans rejoin the Roman Catholic Church, it won't mean much for them, either.

It is more of an acknowledgement of the unity of believers in Christ than anything else.

 

Based on what?

 

The "unity" of believers has nothing to do with all being in the same denomination. It has to do with how we love one another and consider each other brothers and sisters. Not all being in the same denom.

Particularly not when the organisation is a counterfiet "christian" group masquarading as a true one.

Mike

 

Actually we consider the Anglicans to be fully Christians in every sense of the word.

In fact, we consider Baptists to be Christians in every sense of the word.

I suppose there are some Roman Catholics who don't. But they are not following what the Church teaches. And I have to wonder about any supposed Christians who don't consider other Christian denominations to be "real Christians." Those people are definitely not following Jesus.

 

This is from the Parliament website: "A limited number of twenty-six Church of England archbishops and bishops sit in the House, passing their membership on to the next most senior bishop when they retire. The Archbishops of Canterbury and York traditionally get life peerages on retirement."

Their influence may be limited, but it is there.

And a recent trip to a heavily Catholic region in Spain reminded me that Catholics do not unite so much under Christ as they do under Mary.

I visited a number of "Churches" and shrines. In every one Mary was adorned with jewels, the best material weaved with GOLD thread donated by the poverty stricken towns-people. Mary was a large model, in the centre of attention and glowed with special lights. Off in the corner, in the dark, looking powerless, forgotten, hung a smaller statue, suffering and this depicted the Catholic Christ.

Speaking with Catholics themselves you find Mary is the one to whom they pray because she is kind, benevolent and patient. They do not pray straight to Christ because He is seen as angry at their sin and just waiting to strike them down.

Maybe the Anglican church is not all it should be, but on paper you do not find a lot wrong with them around soteriology.

The Catholic church does not teach Biblical salvation, it does not worship the Christ of the Bible and I do not want its religious and political ambitions to get a foot in the door of the UK.

Some Catholics are Christians I believe, but there is no way on God's green earth that I will ever stand side by side with an organisation that sends people to hell by its teachings.

I am not against catholics, but against Catholic theology.

 

This was on our ABC TV (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) this evening, an interview between 'The 7:30 Report' presenter (Kerry O'Brien) and the Archbishop of Sydney (Peter Jenson). The comments of Peter Jenson were that there was no way there would be a unity between the two denominations this side of heaven.

He stated that there was a lot of overstatement in the report, that the members of the committee were overoptimistic about the progress, and probably just reflecting the fact that in committee the people concerned were simply getting on well with each other. Some Anglicans would be happy to become part of the RC church, but many will not, and also pointed out that maybe the RC church wouldn't be happy to have a part of the Anglican church associated with them, particularly the parts appointing homosexual bishops and women bishops (a bit of a dig at some of the US bits of the Anglicans (Episcopalins))

Interestingly the co-chairman of the joint committee is the Archishop of Brisbane (Australia) and his comments in print are

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Brisbane Archbishop John Bathersby has poured cold water on an overnight report suggesting that the Anglican and Catholic churches are close to agreement on a proposal for unity.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Archbishop Bathersby, who co-chairs the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM), said in a joint statement with Anglican Bishop David Beetge that the London Times report, which carries the headline: "Churches back plan to unite under Pope", is "unfortunate".[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The bishops say that the Commission's proposal was "prematurely reported in a way which misrepresents its intentions and sensationalises its conclusions.""

[/FONT]http://www.cathnews.com/news/702/107.php

​

Regards
Bob

 

Thanks for that Bob, it is good news.

 

(Barbarian notes that Roman Catholics consider other Christian denominations to be fully Christian)

Yep. From the commentary by the RCC on Lumen Gentium, from the Second Vatican Council:

"The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God's word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize."

5. The non-Christian may not be blamed for his ignorance of Christ and his Church; salvation is open to him also, if he seeks God sincerely and if he follows the commands of his conscience, for through this means the Holy Ghost acts upon all men; this divine action is not confined within the limited boundaries of the visible Church."

And here, from John Paul II:
It follows that these separated churches and communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Unitatis Redintegratio, para. 3, quoted in Ut Unum Sint, para. 10)

To the extent that these elements are found in other Christian communities, the one church of Christ is effectively present in them. For this reason the Second Vatican Council speaks of a certain, though imperfect communion. The Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium stresses that the Catholic Church "recognizes that in many ways she is linked" with these communities by a true union in the Holy Spirit. (Ut Unum Sint, para. 11).

What about this:

(Stuff from the middle ages mostly misunderstood from conflating the Catholic Church (all Christians) with the Roman Catholic Church (one denomination of Christians))

Remember, there were no other sorts of Christians at the time. Again, the "holy Catholic Church" means all of us, not just one denomination.

If believing people outside the Roman Catholic Church can be Christians is to be a bad Catholic, then the popes and bishops of the RCC have been bad Catholics. As you just learned we firmly believe that other denominations can save and that they derive their authority from the same source as we do, from Christ.

And now you know better. Go and spread false witness no more.

Well, as you can see, that's not an issue, since we already know that they can be saved outside of the RCC.

Why not go learn more about it? Here's a hint: if you want to learn about capitalism, don't ask Fidel Castro.

 

So Pope Boniface VIII was wrong when he stated:

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)"

What's to be misunderstood here? Was it wrong? Was it a mistake? A misprint?

Granted, the other quotes may leave some wriggle-room, but not this!

 

You're right. That's why the quotes and material I used was all from Roman Catholic Websites.

 

What could this mean for Northern Ireland. Ian Paisley must be fuming.

 

Pity you couldn't find anything later than the 1300s. The statement about the supremacy of the pontif in temporal matters applied only to the political conditions existing at the tiem in Europe, when the rulers claimed legitmacy through the Church. The Church makes no such claims about it today, nor does it claim that salvation depends on one's submission to temporal power of any religious agent.

But now that you know what the RCC teaches, I'm sure you won't be doing any further false witness about it.

You won't, will you?

Here, I'll repeat what it says, again...

From the commentary by the RCC on Lumen Gentium, from the Second Vatican Council:

"The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God's word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize."

5. The non-Christian may not be blamed for his ignorance of Christ and his Church; salvation is open to him also, if he seeks God sincerely and if he follows the commands of his conscience, for through this means the Holy Ghost acts upon all men; this divine action is not confined within the limited boundaries of the visible Church."

And here, from John Paul II:
It follows that these separated churches and communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Unitatis Redintegratio, para. 3, quoted in Ut Unum Sint, para. 10)

To the extent that these elements are found in other Christian communities, the one church of Christ is effectively present in them. For this reason the Second Vatican Council speaks of a certain, though imperfect communion. The Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium stresses that the Catholic Church "recognizes that in many ways she is linked" with these communities by a true union in the Holy Spirit. (Ut Unum Sint, para. 11).

I'm puzzled why it's so important to you to misrepresent what the RCC teaches about other Christians.

 

Hard to say, since "tolerance" in Northern Ireland seems to be "don't kill each other."

 

Interesting, because the Catholic website I went to listed that on their page about there being no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church. Maybe you could e-mail http://www.catholicism.org/eens.html and clear up the confusion for them.

Well, if you can tell me where I've been a false witness I will certainly stop.

Well, that's nice, but its not the whole story, is it?

I'm glad you asked. Let's look some more into what come out of the Second Vatican Council. Everything in quotes from here on is from that council.

Two problems. First of all, it should have stopped with simplying relying on Scripture, Tradition has nothing worthy to add. Second, "this pilgrim church" has nothing to do with salvation. By stating "this" pilgrim church it by definition excludes others.

Starts off well, but again, it has its problems.

The Biblical Baptism of the Holy Spirit is what enters us into the Church, the Body of Christ. Though, I know some of my esteemed Baptist brethren disagree with me here. However, it is not salvation but a result of salvation. Further, they refer here to water baptism and that does not save, but that is another topic.

Further, it speaks of entering and remaining in the church. Salvation is not of works, which our choosing to remain in the church would be.

The statement "that man is not saved who fails to persevere in charity, and remains in the bosom of the Church" I find unScriptural.

I feel the Vatican Council is either confused as to what it believes, is decietful or is trying to be all things to all men.

So, I do not see where I am a false witness, not in the eyes of God anyway.

And Northern Ireland is another topic all together. The protestant democracy of Northern Ireland has elected to be a part of the United Kingdom and not Roman Catholic Ireland. However, some terrorists down south will not recognise that decision of the voting majority. Sadly, some in the North resorted to the same terrible tactics as those who came up North. Many wrongs on both sides.