The myth of grace-only & easy-believism shattered forever

[Enow]

What does the Catechism say?

You know #846 is referring to Catholics leaving the CC for why #847 it is for the unbelievers that do not know "the gospel of Christ and the Church" is "through no fault of their own" is why they might still be considered saved. Again, where are the need for the evangelists there?

 

[Enow]

Kind of a deflection from my question - not to mention, reality (as opposed to just quoting verses).

Well, the Holy Spirit must not be doing his job because you can’t tell me where I can find INFALLIBLE interpretations of the Bible. That means all you have access to are FALLIBLE interpretations of the Bible and your faith is based on uncertainties, guesswork, and errors. So much for your claim (from 1John 2:27) that the Holy Spirit teaches you “everything”!

I would have to say the Holy Spirit is in you, because you believed in the Lord Jesus Christ & that God has raised Him from the dead, but you are not listening to Him, but take your marching orders from whatever the CC has taught you.

Titus 3:10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

Unless you repent from treating the CC as if they are the Holy Spirit, you will never be able to be impartial in reading the truth in His words with His help.

 

[Truther]

So, according to you (and Jesus), I can't call my biological father, "Father". Hilarious.
In Acts 22;1, Paul addresses the Jewish leaders as “fathers”;
in Acts 7:2, Stephen addressed the Jewish religious leaders as “Fathers”;
in ICor 4:15, Paul says “I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel”;
in Philemon 10, Paul says he has become a spiritual “father”.

Were they calling each other "father", thus disobeying Jesus, like the RCC?

9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

"RogerDC,

What are you talking about? Salvation is determined by a Bible-knowledge test.

Here we have the damaged fruit of a RC education . You suggest "knowledge" is not a component of biblical salvation?? So Cults who deny that Jesus is God are going to be okay? They lack true saving knowledge. John has declared that these things are written that we can KNOW....Eph4 is clear to those who are not bound by the false teaching Roman Church;
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:

16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

You, my friend, have been deceived by that false teaching works-based gospel church that leads multitudes astray. Thankfully God saved me from that mess into the freedom of the children of God.

A believer can be saved without so much as ever seeing a Bible, let alone studying it’s contents.

God can and does save many simple and naive persons, but He does not leave them ignorant as you would suggest they remain. The bible teaches we are to study and grow in grace.

Many of the early Christians were totally illiterate or had no Bible at all to read, and yet they made it to Heaven - because the Catholic Church taught them all they need to know. And so it is today - most Catholics don’t study the Bible because there is no need to; the Church teaches them all they require for salvation.[/QUOTE]

I can only believe that God in mercy might save some despite the ignorant and corrupt teaching of that church. We were not there early on, but the churches quickly were in peril from false brethren.
The whole system of sexually deviant and perverted priests, fornicating and doing shameful things, Popes fathering illegitimate children, indulgences, give us a break.
I remember all the nonsense, we are the one true church, lol, they used to pass around a little device when I was young that looks like your avatar, and inside there was a piece of wood that was passed around and people kissed it venerating it as supposedly it was a piece of the cross

The Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1Tim 3:15),

This is true of every faithful local assembly.

not the Scriptures.

This God-dishonoring view of His word is why Catholics are ignorant of true salvation and the word of God.
Jesus has given believers His word as the basis of biblical sanctification;
Jn17;17

The Church is the “fullness” of Christ (Eph 1:22-23), not the Scriptures.

Your false teaching is what Paul warned faithful churches about. That is what keeps Catholics ignorant and multitudes of them are perishing without Christ. To try and suggest believers do not need the scripture is one of the most foolish posts I have seen anywhere. What a disgrace.

[QUOTE]Sola Scriptura is a fool’s paradise invented by heretics … you are welcome to it. As for me, I will stick with the teachings of Christ’s one, true Church[/QUOTE]

You can go with that all the way to the White Throne Judgment, but I would urge you to repent and believe the true gospel.
Jn 3 is not speaking about Christian baptism or baptismal regeneration at all. It does not confer life. Many a deceived and deluded soul will find out on the last day.

 

[Illuminator]

It is how you apply that to mean which is not rightly dividing the word of truth, brother.

The body of Christ as in the body of believers, is not restricted by the CC.

And since the CC does not do any evangelism any more per the Pope, how does that not prove the CC is not solely the body of Christ but not abiding in Him either?

The CC does not claim to be the sole "body of Christ" on earth. She does not exclude non-Catholic Christians, but some of you bend over backwards to exclude yourselves.
CCC817-820

 

[Illuminator]

"RogerDC,
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:

16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

If 2 Timothy 3 proves the sole sufficiency of Scripture, then, by analogy, Ephesians 4 would likewise prove the sufficiency of pastors and teachers for the attainment of Christian perfection. In Ephesians 4, the Christian believer is equipped, built up, brought into unity and mature manhood, and even preserved from doctrinal confusion by means of the teaching function of the Church. This is a far stronger statement of the perfecting of the saints than 2 Timothy 3, yet it does not even mention Scripture.

So if all non-scriptural elements are excluded in 2 Timothy, then, by analogy, Scripture would logically have to be excluded in Ephesians. It is far more reasonable to recognize that the absence of one or more elements in one passage does not mean that they are nonexistent.
The Church and Scripture are both equally necessary and important for teaching.
A Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura

 

[Enow]

The CC does not claim to be the sole "body of Christ" on earth. She does not exclude non-Catholic Christians, but some of you bend over backwards to exclude yourselves.
CCC817-820

Do reread the title above #846 before reading #846 in your Catholic catechism.

# 847 only applies to unbelievers as it is no fault of their own when they do not know the gospel of Christ and the Church for why they are not in the CC.

 

[Illuminator]

Do reread the title above #846 before reading #846 in your Catholic catechism.
# 847 only applies to unbelievers as it is no fault of their own when they do not know the gospel of Christ and the Church for why they are not in the CC.

I didn't cite #846. This is not the first time you RAN from CCC817-820 because it contradicts your preconceptions of how the Church views herself, and peaceful co-existence she seeks with non-Catholic Christians. Vatican II rendered current Protestant hostilities redundant. It seems to me you are only interested in deepening division, which the Bible condemns. We hand you an olive branch and you spit on it.
Somehow you think that you're qualified to interpret a church document on a false sola catechisma premise. There are plenty of sites explaining the proper way to approach the catechism. Forging weapons out of the catechism and using them to attack the Church is a kind of literary sorcery, IMO. This is especially evident when there is no honest inquiry. Honest searchers want the truth of what the catechism means, not the angry opinions of anti-Catholics.
Truth can never be imposed, it can only be proposed to those who are disposed to receive it.

 

[Paul Christensen]

They do not teach a person is saved at all, they teach it is an ongoing process which men are a part of

that’s the major issue, it is no better than Protestant churches who teach prety much a watered down form of Romanism

I didn't know that Ephesians 2:8-9 said: "By grace are you saved through an ongoing process through faith plus works, being of yourself and something earned of God, and including good works."
This would have to be the only way you can read this Scripture reference to be consistent with your comment in your post.

 

[Enow]

I didn't cite #846. This is not the first time you RAN from CCC817-820 because it contradicts your preconceptions of how the Church views herself, and peaceful co-existence she seeks with non-Catholic Christians. Vatican II rendered Protestant hostilities redundant. It seems to me you are only interested in deepening division, which the Bible condemns. We hand you an olive branch and you spit on it. Somehow you think that you're qualified to interpret a church document on a false sola catechisma premise. There are plenty of sites explaining the proper way to approach the catechism. Forging weapons out of the catechism and using them to attack the Church is a kind of literary sorcery, IMO. This is especially evident when there is no honest inquiry. Honest searchers want the truth of what the catechism means, not the angry opinions of anti-Catholics.

Unfortunately, Catholic Church has been known for double speak; they say one thing and then they say another, but I do not believe it is done in hypocrisy but to deceive.

Catholics try to say the CC tried to stop the Spanish Inquisition and yet offer no real evidence to show that they had even tried to, and that is because they believed they were saving the Catholics from leaving the Church so as to force them even to death to stay in it, even if to scare them and others from leaving.

You have to look at Rome for what it was back in Jesus's day as all roads led to Rome would give heathens & Christians the temptations to govern their respective beliefs from Rome out of covetousness to rule and for selfish gains as Pope Clement 1 did in trying to collect a portion from all the churches for which his first epistle to the Corinthians was about when accusing them of jealousy while burying them with scriptural reference to justify this collection from all the churches to him at Rome. But only the Lord can help you discern that man's intentions by his words in that first epistle.

Now the Pope tells Catholic not to convert unbelievers and yet you are to believe CC is the fullness of Christ with evangelists? I bet you the only reason he is saying that is because #847 pertains to unbelievers that never heard the gospel of Christ and the Church to stay in it as #846 warns.

 

[Illuminator]

Unfortunately, Catholic Church has been known for double speak; they say one thing and then they say another, but I do not believe it is done in hypocrisy but to deceive.

Catholic schools and Education
In the field of education, the Catholic Church runs 73.489 kindergartens with 7.043.922 pupils; 95.644 primary schools with 33.289.532 pupils; 47.415 secondary schools with 20.015.659 pupils. The Church also cares for 2.535.327 high school pupils, and 2.904.964 university students.
Catholic charity and healthcare centres Charity and healthcare centres run in the world by the Church include: 5.391 hospitals, most of them in America (1.627) and Africa (1.295); 16.610 dispensaries, mainly in Africa (5.181); America (4.731) and Asia (3.520); 604 Care Homes for people with Leprosy, mainly in Asia (296) and Africa (187); 16.270 Homes for the elderly, or the chronically ill or people with a disability, mainly in Europe (8.348) and America (4.086); 9.924 orphanages, mainly in Asia (3.934); 12.376 creches, mainly in Asia (3.247) and America (3.435); 14.551 marriage counselling centres, mainly in America (5.546)

ALL are served regardless of their religion, and proselyting is forbidden. You think all this is a deception???

Catholics try to say the CC tried to stop the Spanish Inquisition and yet offer no real evidence to show that they had even tried to, and that is because they believed they were saving the Catholics from leaving the Church so as to force them even to death to stay in it, even if to scare them and others from leaving.

The Truth about the Spanish Inquisition - Crisis Magazine
This is a PROTESTANT publication.

You have to look at Rome for what it was back in Jesus's day as all roads led to Rome would give heathens & Christians the temptations to govern their respective beliefs from Rome out of covetousness to rule and for selfish gains as Pope Clement 1 did in trying to collect a portion from all the churches for which his first epistle to the Corinthians was about when accusing them of jealousy while burying them with scriptural reference to justify this collection from all the churches to him at Rome. But only the Lord can help you discern that man's intentions by his words in that first epistle.

You don't quote Clement I, you never do. Instead you make up lies with dishonest editorializing.
"...The author writes because certain factions in Corinth have not given proper respect to the bishops and deacons and have set up new leaders in their place. On the occasion of the epistle, Welborn states (op. cit., p. 1059):

Whatever the causes of the conflict in Corinth, money seems to have been involved. Contrasting the former humility of the Corinthians with the ambition which has now given rise to strife, the author states that the Corinthians had once been 'satisfied with the provision (ephodios) of Christ' (2:1). Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to Soter, observed that it had been the custom of the Roman church from the beginning 'to send contributions (ephodia) to many churchs in every city' (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 4.23.10). From the Roman point of view of Clement, the younger generation of leaders at Corinth are dissatisfied with the provision for their church. What role did this play in the revolt against the presbyters? Were the established presbyters accused of embezzlement? Did the new leaders seek another contribution, to replace the funds their predecessors stole? Polycarp reports that the presbyter Valens was deposed from office for "avarice" (Ad Phil. 11). The unrest of the 1st and 2d centuries almost always had economic causes; and the agreements which brought strife to an end usually included concrete provisions which served the interests of all parties.
(The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 1, p. 1060) another PROTESTANT reference.
First Clement​

Now the Pope tells Catholic not to convert unbelievers and yet you are to believe CC is the fullness of Christ with evangelists? I bet you the only reason he is saying that is because #847 pertains to unbelievers that never heard the gospel of Christ and the Church to stay in it as #846 warns.

"unbelievers that never heard the gospel of Christ and the Church" are not in the Church. Can anyone possibly be that dense to say they are??? Besides, according to your system, anyone who has not heard the gospel, through no fault of their own, are damned to hell. The Calvin god is a monster.

"Now the Pope tells Catholic not to convert unbelievers"

Pope Encourages Youth to Evangelize Hometowns - ZENIT - English
pope tells youth how to evangelize zenit - Bing video
Pope Gives Task to Youth: Evangelize the Net - ZENIT - English
Pope Calls for New Initiatives to Evangelize Youth - ZENIT - English
Francis tells youth to evangelize through the ‘digital world’

This is why discussion with brainwashed anti-Catholics is so pointless.

 

[Enow]

Catholic schools and Education
In the field of education, the Catholic Church runs 73.489 kindergartens with 7.043.922 pupils; 95.644 primary schools with 33.289.532 pupils; 47.415 secondary schools with 20.015.659 pupils. The Church also cares for 2.535.327 high school pupils, and 2.904.964 university students.
Catholic charity and healthcare centres Charity and healthcare centres run in the world by the Church include: 5.391 hospitals, most of them in America (1.627) and Africa (1.295); 16.610 dispensaries, mainly in Africa (5.181); America (4.731) and Asia (3.520); 604 Care Homes for people with Leprosy, mainly in Asia (296) and Africa (187); 16.270 Homes for the elderly, or the chronically ill or people with a disability, mainly in Europe (8.348) and America (4.086); 9.924 orphanages, mainly in Asia (3.934); 12.376 creches, mainly in Asia (3.247) and America (3.435); 14.551 marriage counselling centres, mainly in America (5.546)

ALL are served regardless of their religion, and proselyting is forbidden. You think all this is a deception???

That is not what nor where the deception is in.

The Truth about the Spanish Inquisition - Crisis Magazine
This is a PROTESTANT publication.

You don't quote Clement I, you never do. Instead you make up lies with dishonest editorializing.

You just quoted someone stating money was the problem, and they "replaced" the bishops sent to collect from that church to take to the "Pope" at Rome.

"...The author writes because certain factions in Corinth have not given proper respect to the bishops and deacons and have set up new leaders in their place. On the occasion of the epistle, Welborn states (op. cit., p. 1059):

Whatever the causes of the conflict in Corinth, money seems to have been involved. Contrasting the former humility of the Corinthians with the ambition which has now given rise to strife, the author states that the Corinthians had once been 'satisfied with the provision (ephodios) of Christ' (2:1). Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to Soter, observed that it had been the custom of the Roman church from the beginning 'to send contributions (ephodia) to many churchs in every city' (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 4.23.10). From the Roman point of view of Clement, the younger generation of leaders at Corinth are dissatisfied with the provision for their church. What role did this play in the revolt against the presbyters? Were the established presbyters accused of embezzlement? Did the new leaders seek another contribution, to replace the funds their predecessors stole? Polycarp reports that the presbyter Valens was deposed from office for "avarice" (Ad Phil. 11). The unrest of the 1st and 2d centuries almost always had economic causes; and the agreements which brought strife to an end usually included concrete provisions which served the interests of all parties.
(The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 1, p. 1060) another PROTESTANT reference.
First Clement​

That's not what I read in that epistle. The church was with holding collection from Clement and the Church at Rome.

If you want to spare me walking you through it, read it at this link. Otherwise...

First Clement: Clement of Rome

1Clem prologue:1
The Church of God which sojourneth in Rome to the Church of God which
sojourneth in Corinth,...

"1Clem 3:4
For this cause righteousness and peace stand aloof, while each
man hath forsaken the fear of the Lord and become purblind in the
faith of Him, neither walketh in the ordinances of His commandments
nor liveth according to that which becometh Christ, but each goeth
after the lusts of his evil heart, seeing that they have conceived an
unrighteous and ungodly jealousy, through which also death entered
into the world."

He goes on citing numerous references as examples to jealousy.

This is where I get the understanding that Clement was defending his collectors that was sent to get the Church at Corinth to yield by being hospitable and to not deny the collection they came for.

"1Clem 11:1
For his hospitality and godliness Lot was saved from Sodom, when all
the country round about was judged by fire and brimstone; the Master
having thus fore shown that He forsaketh not them which set their
hope on Him, but appointeth unto punishment and torment them which
swerve aside."

"1Clem 12:2
For when the spies were sent forth unto Jericho by Joshua the son of
Nun, the king of the land perceived that they were come to spy out
his country, and sent forth men to seize them, that being seized they
might be put to death.

1Clem 12:3
So the hospitable Rahab received them and hid them in the upper
chamber under the flax stalks."

1Clem 14:1
Therefore it is right and proper, brethren, that we should be
obedient unto God, rather than follow those who in arrogance and
unruliness have set themselves up as leaders in abominable jealousy.

1Clem 14:2
For we shall bring upon us no common harm, but rather great peril, if
we surrender ourselves recklessly to the purposes of men who launch
out into strife and seditions, so as to estrange us from that which
is right.

1Clem 44:3
For it will be no light sin for us, if we thrust out those who have
offered the gifts of the bishop's office unblamably and holily.

1Clem 44:4
Blessed are those presbyters who have gone before, seeing that their
departure was fruitful and ripe: for they have no fear lest any one
should remove them from their appointed place.

1Clem 44:5
For we see that ye have displaced certain persons, though they were
living honorably, from the ministration which had been respected by
them blamelessly.

Clement was seeing his collectors as Presbyters but Presbyters don't departs with fruitful and ripe/ collection. They are suppose to stay in that city, but they weren't. That is why they were denied and why Clement felt the pinch of being estranged from that which he believed was theirs by right. So, yeah, they were removed all right, and so easily because they only came for the annual collection for the Church at Rome.

That whole epistle was one long line of bull trying to make the Church at Corinth to yield to them as ones in authority deserving of a portion from the bounty collected at the Church at Corinth to give to the collectors from the Church at Rome.

If you fail to see the forest for all the trees, then you fail to see the intentions of bondage and covetous spirit that Clement was writing for.

Catholic Churches give a collection to the upper governing body; that is the practice that was started and what was going on in that epistle where the Corinth refuse to give a portion from the bounty to the Church at Rome. That is why they were accused of jealousy.

"unbelievers that never heard the gospel of Christ and the Church" are not in the Church. Can anyone possibly be that dense to say they are???

Sometimes victims of deception refuse to believe the ones they have trusted for so long all their lives has deceived them for their own personal gain.

You can't even see how #846 was meant to enslave believers to the Catholic system of works to lord over them and to threaten them for leaving..

Besides, according to your system, anyone who has not heard the gospel, through no fault of their own, are damned to hell. The Calvin god is a monster.

I am not a follower of Calvin. Jesus Christ is my Good Shepherd. Jesus Christ helps me to follow Him.

Pope Encourages Youth to Evangelize Hometowns - ZENIT - English
pope tells youth how to evangelize zenit - Bing video
Pope Gives Task to Youth: Evangelize the Net - ZENIT - English
Pope Calls for New Initiatives to Evangelize Youth - ZENIT - English
Francis tells youth to evangelize through the ‘digital world’

This is why discussion with brainwashed anti-Catholics is so pointless.

I thank you for sharing but the problem remains for double-speaking. He may have said that many years ago, but look at what the Pope says now.

 

[Illuminator]

.

Clement solved the problem, and you are trying to say he caused it.
1 Clement is certainly good for showing that the (very) early Church did believe in authority and that authority came from apostolic succession and the laying on of hands.

Pope Clement’s style was that of an extremely gentle persuasion. It’s hard to see authority because he isn’t much concerned with establishing it *per se *(and unless it was under dispute, why would he?) : he is sincerely trying to focus on the issue and bring about a healing of the schism.

The authority, however -and this is something you might see even to this day practiced - is there, just gently so. Clement sends two representatives (today they would be legates) who were to deliver to the Corinthians his letter. Notice at the end of that letter he basically concludes by saying,

(I paraphrase) ‘And once you have done what I have described should be done in this letter, please kindly return to me my legates so they can tell me the good news that all is again well at the Church in Corinth’.

It is there in the final paragraphs. Clement’s legates didn’t have armed Imperial guards or some Christian mob backing them up to restore order: Christian communion at this time rested almost entirely on good-will and fidelity, which is no doubt why Pope Clement spends so much time quoting scripture to refresh the mind of the faithful at the Church in Corinth of our transcendent and noble vocation. Clement knows as the Church knows to this day that the word of God has a powerful way of brining Christians back to their Christian faith and, so to speak, senses: this is why scripture quotations are used in the liturgy to prepare us for the sacred mysteries and dispose us for divine worship and gratitude. That is, he used the scripture quotes not merely as an authority to prove his points, but also to get the squabbling Corinthians out of thinking in petty terms and back into thinking like faithful servants of our Lord and Saviour: he has to be gentle because that’s his best route for healing the schism. He has no way of actually forcing them outside, perhaps, of excommunication, which who knows if such a thing would be successful in restoring unity or was, at that point in Pope Clement’s judgement, complete overkill and totally unnecessary.

And as far as we know, it worked; in fact, we are told that the Corinthian Church strongly believed that Clement’s letter(s) should be used in their Church’s readings along with the writings of the Apostles.

1 Clement is good for proving apostolic succession and real authority in the early Church. His letter shows how things were set-up and were properly understood to work by Apostolic ordinance for the Church after them.

It can be used to show that Pope Clement was exercising authority in Corinth: what he asked in his letter isn’t really or ultimately a simple request. He expects them to do it and send back his legates safe and sound telling him they did restore order as he outlined was proper for the Church; that, however, takes some thinking and work. It is not so good for proving infallibility unless you connect it to the fact that the Corinthians thought his letter(s) were, in effect, divinely inspired and suitable for use in the liturgy or readings right alongside the Apostles’ own letters; but, of course, it only hints or points to infallibility.

You assume what you are trying to prove, that Clement abused his authority. Sheer nonsense.

You can't even see how #846 was meant to enslave believers to the Catholic system of works to lord over them and to threaten them for leaving..

This comment is hypocritical and arrogant. The risk of losing salvation is not a threat, it is a consequence for rejecting the Gospel with full knowledge of it. All Protestant churches (except Calvinism) teach the same thing. "Catholic system of works" is another stupid mantra that has no validity.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation" (because that is what the Apostles taught)

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers335 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.336 ("knowing" then rejecting, is the condition for not being saved, the same as any Protestant church teaches, but you remain blind to that, and keep harping about 846 with hostile opinions)

847 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.337

848 "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."338
WHERE IS THE THREAT??? You are defining "Church" according to Protestant paradigms. We have the same right to define ourselves as you do, but you seek to deny us that right.

I am not a follower of Calvin. Jesus Christ is my Good Shepherd. Jesus Christ helps me to follow Him.

Maybe not, but your insults are just as stupid as his. It's not Jesus that instructs you to lie and persecute Catholicism with so much nonsense.

I thank you for sharing but the problem remains for double-speaking. He may have said that many years ago, but look at what the Pope says now.

Convincing and proselytizing is not evangelizing. You only hear what you want to hear. What the Pope says is not as important as what he does. Your anti-Catholicism is an ideology of clanging symbols and hollow drums.

 

[Illuminator]

Judge Pope Francis against the Gospel—not your ideology

We are seven years into a papacy in which almost every moment has been a social-media-saturated global event. Yet one of its most iconic moments remains a somber moment on a remote Mediterranean island, far from the centers of power and wealth. Pope Francis traveled to Lampedusa only four months into his papacy to visit Italy’s southernmost island on the Mediterranean, where so many have died making the crossing from North Africa to Europe.

Pope Francis described his reasons for coming in his homily on the island, delivered a couple of weeks after an incident in which at least 10 migrants drowned off the coast of Malta:

When I first heard of this tragedy a few weeks ago, and realized that it happens all too frequently, it has constantly come back to me like a painful thorn in my heart. So I felt that I had to come here today, to pray and to offer a sign of my closeness, but also to challenge our consciences lest this tragedy be repeated. Please, let it not be repeated!
​

What strikes one in reading this is its sheer simplicity: Pope Francis saw a situation and responded to it. And yet, for all the simplicity of this gesture, it was deeply rich, embodying in all its profundity the heart of the Gospel.

As a political scientist, I am fascinated by how Francis preaches the Gospel in the public square. Popes have long addressed matters of real concern for our public life. But how can they do so without getting mired in partisan and ideological debates?

After all, given the deep divisions within modern politics, it is nearly inevitable that the church’s message will be interpreted in ideological terms. But the church does not want its message to be reduced to ideology, much less to be seen as one special interest pitted against others. So how does it guard against ideological capture?

The pope’s visit to Lampedusa reveals at least three ways in which Pope Francis aims to transcend the ideologies of our time: how he preaches the Gospel; his preference for actions over words; and his humility.

First, Pope Francis preaches the Gospel. In preaching it, he has urged the church to “to concentrate on the essentials,” thus “giving direct expression to the heart of the Gospel” (“Evangelii Gaudium,” No. 37). The heart of the Gospel is Christ’s love and mercy, which is to say, “faith working through love.”

Pope Francis did not invent the “hierarchy of truths,” but he does deploy it uniquely: not simply as a criterion for the truth of our words, but for the goodness of our actions. The Gospel and church teaching call us to do many good things, but “there is one sign which we should never lack: the option for those who are least, those whom society discards” (“Evangelii Gaudium,” No. 193).

Preaching the core of the Gospel, then, means embracing a conversion from ideology and self-interest toward the love of God and neighbor. When Pope Francis says that the tragedy of migrants dying at sea “has constantly come back to me like a painful thorn in my heart,” he signals a need to be sensitive to love and mercy, and to want to respond to it. As Cardinal Michael Czerny, S.J., told America (magazine) by email: “Responding with actions of welcoming, protecting, promoting and integrating isn’t ideological or partisan, it is how each of us should express our inner Good Samaritan.”

In preaching the heart of the Gospel, Pope Francis challenges us: How does the “option for the least” animate our public life? There are many good policies that one might promote based upon the Gospel or Catholic social teaching. But this option must be the inspiration for all of them.

Second, Francis teaches with actions. When Pope Francis went to Lampedusa, he gave a catechism in the intimate connection between thoughts, feelings and actions. One ought not just know that immigrants and refugees require help. One ought to feel for those persons and thereby be moved to do something for them. As Austen Ivereigh notes in The Great Reformer, at Lampedusa Pope Francis was “asking for the grace to cry for our indifference” and to be moved to actively cultivate a new attitude. As Francis himself said: “I wish to offer some thoughts meant to challenge people’s consciences and lead them to reflection and a concrete change of heart.”

In an age of social media, actions can be transmitted instantaneously around the world. The media can be used to spread the Gospel through images. Actions particularly help us privilege realities over ideals, a key principle of Pope Francis’ thought. In September 2015, for example, he asked all “parishes, religious communities, monasteries and shrines throughout Europe” to “express the Gospel in a concrete way and host a refugee family.” In Cardinal Czerny’s words: “Here is the need. Let each one do something about it.”

Francis also teaches with words. His emphasis on action does not undercut his theology. But what is most distinctive about this pope is the way he incarnates the Gospel message through his merciful and loving actions in the midst of God’s people. His Petrine ministry is above all a presence, a way of being, a spirituality.

This leads me to my third and final point. Francis is the pope, which puts him at the head of the College of Bishops and thus at the head of the global church. But he does not always present himself as an expert or ruler. He often, in fact, presents himself as a servant and friend: as a brother and companion. In going to Lampedusa, for instance, he referred to the people who had died in crossing the Mediterranean as “brothers and sisters” not in a pro forma way, but as someone who had placed himself in the midst of their suffering.

Such a stance could not be more countercultural. When everyone wants answers to quell their fears and anxieties, ideologues invariably claim to have all the solutions. Pope Francis does not. Indeed, many of the “big ideas” of his papacy, including discernment; the four principles of “Evangelii Gaudium” (time is greater than space; unity prevails over conflict; realities are more important than ideas; and the whole is greater than the part); and even synodality assume that he does not have all the answers. Instead, he desires to empower the whole church in search of such answers.

In other words, Pope Francis most characteristically invites his listeners to share space with them, to join him in a process.

To be sure, Pope Francis has bigger goals in exercising his ministry than avoiding ideological capture. But in preaching the core of the Gospel, privileging action and acting in humility, Francis has given us a vision of someone who lives in and through the Gospel, and indeed in constant self-reflection about the pride and myopia that accompany ideology.
Judge Pope Francis against the Gospel—not your ideology

OK, so Enow posted a pope bashing video. There are millions of those to choose from. What I would like to see is a Catholic made video bashing Protestants. One will do.

 

[Enow]

I didn't cite #846. This is not the first time you RAN from CCC817-820 because it contradicts your preconceptions of how the Church views herself, and peaceful co-existence she seeks with non-Catholic Christians. Vatican II rendered current Protestant hostilities redundant. It seems to me you are only interested in deepening division, which the Bible condemns. We hand you an olive branch and you spit on it.
Somehow you think that you're qualified to interpret a church document on a false sola catechisma premise. There are plenty of sites explaining the proper way to approach the catechism. Forging weapons out of the catechism and using them to attack the Church is a kind of literary sorcery, IMO. This is especially evident when there is no honest inquiry. Honest searchers want the truth of what the catechism means, not the angry opinions of anti-Catholics.
Truth can never be imposed, it can only be proposed to those who are disposed to receive it.

I can read that part you had referenced well enough and that part of the catechism also supports what I am saying as yet you missed the build up to making the CC the means for the body of Christ to exists in.

CCC - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 3 ARTICLE 9 PARAGRAPH 3

 

[RogerDC]

Not necessarily. Not Paul's style. His general attitude is that he feels he doesn't need approval from any man except Jesus Himself. He said that when he received the revelation of the gospel, he said he "conferred not with flesh and blood". So it would be out of character for him to go and seek approval for the gospel that he received from the Lord by revelation from any mortal men, even if they were Apostles. In fact he was not seeking approval in his description of his meeting with the Apostles:
"And recognizing the grace that I had been given, James, Cephas, and John—those reputed to be pillars—gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised" (Galatians 2:9).

Whether or not Paul personally felt the need for Church approval is a matter of speculation, but what we do know is it that is was “by revelation” (Gal 2:2) that Paul decided to go to the Church leaders in Jerusalem in order that his gospel receive official approval. By “revelation” we can assume the Holy Spirit sent him to seek that approval.

Furthermore, to argue that all believers are guided by the Holy Spirit just as Paul was, is absurd. Obviously, Paul was granted a special grace and used by Christ to convey the word of God to the masses and was also chosen to write several epistles that became Sacred Scripture. This grace is not given to every believer - how many books of the NT did you write?

 

[Paul Christensen]

Whether or not Paul personally felt the need for Church approval is a matter of speculation, but what we do know is it that is was “by revelation” (Gal 2:2) that Paul decided to go to the Church leaders in Jerusalem in order that his gospel receive official approval. By “revelation” we can assume the Holy Spirit sent him to seek that approval.

Furthermore, to argue that all believers are guided by the Holy Spirit just as Paul was, is absurd. Obviously, Paul was granted a special grace and used by Christ to convey the word of God to the masses and was also chosen to write several epistles that became Sacred Scripture. This grace is not given to every believer - how many books of the NT did you write?

But he nor the Apostles had to wear fancy hats and robes and be addressed as "your grace" or "your eminence". As soon as I see a religious leader wearing a fancy hat and robes and addressed as Your Very Reverend, my crap detector goes "Whoop! Whoop! Whoop!", because I see a person using a fancy getup and title to appear to have a spiritual authority that God never gave him.

 

[RogerDC]

Paul said we have been saved multiple times

You're confusing the promise and hope of salvation with salvation now.
Any verse that appears to say that we are saved NOW has been superficially misinterpreted and has not been interpreted in light of the whole body of Scripture - there are several verses that imply a believer can fall away, either from a loss of faith or by committing “deadly” sins. There are masses of formerly devout Christians who are now atheists - are they still “saved”? If you lose your faith, will you still be saved?

Furthermore, to claim that you are already “saved” is to judge yourself, thereby putting yourself in the place of the one who sits on the Judgement Throne - Christ.
And Paul says, "I do not even judge myself. I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not therefore acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgement before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then every man will receive his commendation from God." (1Cor 4:3-5)

we may not be living in our saved state, but as Paul said, we have been saved, by Grace through faith (a completed action)

It is not a “completed” action - salvation is a life-long process (Paul likens it to running a race) and coming to faith is only the first step. Jesus himself said believers can lose their faith (Luke 8:13), and Heb 6:4-6 describes believers who “tasted the heavenly gift and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit” but fell away and into “apostasy” (which means total rejection of their Christian beliefs). Your salvation is not “completed” until after you die and are judged and granted eternal life by Christ.

and we have been saved not by good works, but by Gods mercy.

No one is saved by good works alone, but by faith and works. ​

I have been justified.

You can lose your justification.

I have been perfected by one sacrifice.

No, you have been offered the chance of being perfected by one sacrifice. You are not perfected in this life.

Furthermore, the sanctifying effects of the Cross can be rendered useless:
“How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved for the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant BY WHICH HE WAS SANCTIFIED, and outraged the Spirit of grace? … It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:29-31)

I have been given eternal life

Not yet. So far all you have is the promise and hope of eternal life … IF you are judged “worthy” of salvation (Rev 3:4).

I have been given the spirit as a seal until that day of redemption

That seal is conditional - it can be broken if you lose your faith or you commit “deadly” sins.

I can go on and on what God says I have right here and right now

I'm sure you could, but I can do without more amateurish interpretations of Scripture.

 

[RogerDC]

Well let’s see

Paul told Timothy as a child he had enough knowledge to be saved

he only had the OT as a child

2 Timothy 3:15
and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus

Which part of the OT preaches salvation by faith in Jesus Christ?

and he specifically says the scripture is able to make a man thoroughly equipped for every good work

So what? Are you saying good works are all that is required for salvation? Actually, it can be argued that being “thoroughly equipped for every good work” is what 2Tim 3:16 is all about - hardly a complete recipe for salvation.

 

[RogerDC]

Yet Paul went for three years with only Gods approval to the gentiles, with no knowledge of the Jerusalem church.

as you say it would be obvious to any intelligent adult Paul did not need approval, That God was with him, and would be whether the peter approved of him or not

In Galatians 2:2, Paul describes how he was sent by the Holy Spirit (“by revelation”) to the Church leaders in Jerusalem in order to have his gospel officially approved. That’s what your Bible says, but you can deny it if you so desire.