LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.


The statement brought swift criticism from Protestant leaders. "It makes us question whether we are indeed praying together for Christian unity," said the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, a fellowship of 75 million Protestants in more than 100 countries.

"It makes us question the seriousness with which the Roman Catholic Church takes its dialogues with the reformed family and other families of the church," the group said in a letter charging that the document took ecumenical dialogue back to the era before the Second Vatican Council.

It was the second time in a week that Benedict has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-1965 meetings that modernized the church. On Saturday, Benedict revived the old Latin Mass — a move cheered by Catholic traditionalists but criticized by more liberal ones as a step backward from Vatican II.

Among the council's key developments were its ecumenical outreach and the development of the New Mass in the vernacular, which essentially replaced the old Latin Mass.

Benedict, who attended Vatican II as a young theologian, has long complained about what he considers its erroneous interpretation by liberals, saying it was not a break from the past but rather a renewal of church tradition.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which Benedict headed before becoming pope, said it was issuing the new document Tuesday because some contemporary theological interpretations of Vatican II's ecumenical intent had been "erroneous or ambiguous" and had prompted confusion and doubt.

The new document — formulated as five questions and answers — restates key sections of a 2000 text the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which riled Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation."

The commentary repeated church teaching that says the Catholic Church "has the fullness of the means of salvation."

"Christ 'established here on earth' only one church," said the document released as the pope vacations at a villa in Lorenzago di Cadore, in Italy's Dolomite mountains.

The other communities "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense" because they do not have apostolic succession — the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ's original apostles — and therefore their priestly ordinations are not valid, it said

More: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_re_eu/pope_other_christians;_ylt=AuVRq8tMPbghEtZg53qv0J7MWM0F

Discuss?

Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church

In or over what exactly?

approving a document released Tuesday that says other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches

Written by whom?

Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.

Really?

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh to the Father but by me." John 14:6.

Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12

For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ
1 Thessalonians 5:9

And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,
Hebrews 5:9

And so on and so forth.

Would someone be kind enough to have a word with Benny please  . Ta!

The statement brought swift criticism from Protestant leaders

So?

God bless
TV

jesus never founded any church, so no point really laying emphasis on churches instead of Christ and His teachings.

@Aproko,

Aproko:

jesus never founded any church, so no point really laying emphasis on churches instead of Christ and His teachings.

Matthew 16:18 -- "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Religion is a sham, there are about a billion catholics in the world who believe they are the only true path and there are the other denominations who believe that the catholics are brain washed and are being led astray, so who is right and who is wrong here why is every body confused and without direction?

mazaje:

so who is right and who is wrong here why is every body confused and without direction?

No one needs to be confused. Just mirror what the Roman Catholic Church teaches against the Word of God, and things will become clear to you. Hope that's not too hard to do?

pilgrim.1:

@Aproko,

Matthew 16:18 -- "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

does that make peter a rock?

Jesus could never have said that because the word "CHURCH" never existed in the vocabulary of Judea during his time.That passage is nothing but a forgery.

pilgrim.1:

@Aproko,

Matthew 16:18 -- "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

@Aproko,

does that make peter a rock?

That does not make Peter the Rock that Jesus was talking about. Check the greek words for both. Peter means a stone while the rock Jesus mentioned means a rock.

http://pnt.biblecommenter.com/matthew/16.htm


Matthew 16:18 Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. This is the first time Jesus speaks of his church, and here, as not yet founded. Three terms are to be noted: (1) Peter, in the Greek, Petros, meaning a single stone; (2) Rock, in the Greek, Petra, which means the solid, immovable bed-rock, a great mass like a cliff, and (3) church, Greek, ecclesia, those called out, the fellowship of believers, the organized society of Christ, the kingdom of heaven on earth. There is probably no passage in the word of God that has called forth more discussion. The Papal church insists that Peter is the rock upon which Christ founded his church. The Catholic position is based upon the fact that Peter means a stone, and the Savior's language might be rendered, Thou art a stone and upon this rock I will build my church (see John 1:42). The Catholic view is untenable, for (1) The Savior does not say, Thou art a stone, and upon thee I will build, etc. or Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build. He changes the word in the Greek from Petros (Peter, a stone) to Petra, a rock, or ledge of rock--a solid bed-rock. (2) Every saint is a stone (see 1Pe 2:5). The Lord declares that Peter is one these living stones, made such by his confession of faith, and ready to be built into the church, the spiritual temple, formed of living stones, and built upon the rock. So is every confessor of Christ. In order to settle what the Savior does mean by the rock, we must consider Mt 16:18,19 together, and keep in mind the entire figure. This figure portrays (1) a Builder, Christ; (2) a temple to be built, composed of lively stones, the church; (3) a foundation for that temple, the rock; (4) the gates of an unfriendly city or power which shall seek its destruction, hell, or more correctly, Hades, the unseen abode of the dead, the grave; (5) a door-keeper of the church, or spiritual temple, with his keys, Peter. Peter's place in the figure is not that of the foundation, but that of the key-holder, or turnkey. The only difficulty is in settling what the Lord means by the rock. Since this rock is the foundation of the church, the central principle, the fundamental idea, we are aided to a correct decision by the teachings of the Word elsewhere. We learn [through Paul] That other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. This excludes Peter or any human platform (1Co 3:11). Christ is often called a stone: (1) the stone that the builders rejected (Mt 21:42 Mr 12:10 Lu 20:17); (2) the chief corner stone (Eph 2:20); (3) the stone that is the head of the corner (Mt 21:42 Mr 12:10 Lu 20:17 Ac 4:11 1Pe 2:7); (4) the spiritual rock which is Christ (1Co 10:4). Faith in Christ held in the heart, and confessed with the lips is the very foundation of the spiritual life and of the church. This constituted the fundamental difference in apostolic days between Christians and unbelievers, the church and the world. It does still. It is the essence of the teaching of the New Testament that the platform or foundation of the Christian society, the church, is this belief that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (see Mt 16:16 Joh 6:69). It is then Peter's grand confession, faith in the Spiritual Rock, the faith that lays hold of Christ, belief that he is the Anointed of God, the Divine Savior, that the Lord pronounces the rock upon which he will found his church. That this view is correct is shown by a correct understanding of the declaration.

The gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The gates of Hades (Revised Version). From the gates of the city always marched forth its armies. The powers of hades are represented by its gates. Hades is not hell (Gehenna), but the unseen abode of the dead that holds the departed within its gates. Just after these words the Lord talks of his death, or entering hades. Six months later the Sanhedrin sent him to death for making the same confession Peter had just made. See Mt 26:64-67. They expected to demonstrate that the confession of his divinity which he had made was false by sending him to hades, which they supposed would hold him and prevail against the confession of the ROCK. He was sent there from the cross, but the gates of hades did not prevail, for they could not hold him, and the living Savior, rising triumphant from the tomb, was the unanswerable argument that his own and Peter's confession was a rock that could never be moved. His resurrection demonstrated that he is the Rock. Hades did not prevail.

mazaje:

Religion is a sham, there are about a billion catholics in the world who believe they are the only true path and there are the other denominations who believe that the catholics are brain washed and are being led astray, so who is right and who is wrong here why is every body confused and without direction?

One of the most amusing things in life is observing not just diverse, opposing religions claiming that theirs is the only way to paradise, but also sects within religions stating that the other sects lead only to perdition.

mazaje:

Religion is a sham, there are about a billion catholics in the world who believe they are the only true path and there are the other denominations who believe that the catholics are brain washed and are being led astray, so who is right and who is wrong here why is every body confused and without direction?

Is it too much for people to simply read the Bible and see where the Catholic Church stands?

pilgrim.1:

No one needs to be confused. Just mirror what the Roman Catholic Church teaches against the Word of God, and things will become clear to you. Hope that's not too hard to do?

I can't understand what is against the Word of God Catholic Church is teaching. This is a serious attack that has no proof. Catholic Church remain the true church. It is undisputable.

@ebos

Read the Bible and see for yourself what the bible teaches, then you can compare if some of this churches are actually doing the same thing. ("Thou shall not make any graven image and bow down to them" why all the shrines in catholic churches?

ebos:

I can't understand what is against the Word of God Catholic Church is teaching. This is a serious attack that has no proof. Catholic Church remain the true church. It is undisputable.

Dear ebos,

As I did not want any Catholic to come away feeling that pilgrim.1 is a serious problem to them, you can see that I've refrained from trying to produce an epistle to "detail" the issues surrounding the debate on Catholicism. Rather, what I've offered is a brief pointer to help readers and enquirers check out issues for themselves.

That said, I did not mean to launch into any "serious attack" against the Roman Catholic Church. In all fairness, I think we should have to agree that non-Catholics felt "seriously attacked" by the Pope's assertion that other Christians are NOT true Churches! Does the Pope have any "proof" for that as well?

Cheers.

@Pilgrim & Co

You see I find it difficult to believe that most so-called Pastors in the Protestant Churches are real anointed men of God. Though, I believe some might be good Christians but cannot classify them as having been anointed because their anointing cannot be traced to the Apostles. The problems Christians keep on having today is summarized in one word GREED. This is the major reason those who think they are called by God have continued to establish churches in every street.

@Locoman

Then condemn all Jesus Christ pictures in your house and stop having the intuition that those pictures are Jesus in any place you see them. They are all images.

@ebos,

I feel your concerns. However, let me highlight a few things for you:

ebos:

You see I find it difficult to believe that most so-called Pastors in the Protestant Churches are real anointed men of God. Though, I believe some might be good Christians but cannot classify them as having been anointed because their anointing cannot be traced to the Apostles.

It all depends on what you mean by "trace" their anointing to the Apostles. There's really no such thing, ebos - you can check it out in the Bible.

It is true that some people have tried to 'fake' the anointing which God truly gives. But it is not healthy to assume that the anointing is reserved only within the confines of the Catholic Church. God is sovereign, and He chooses to call, equip and anoint whomsoever He wills (Heb. 2:4 - "according to His own will". He doesn't do it according to the dictates of any institution or system.

ebos:

The problems Christians keep on having today is summarized in one word GREED. This is the major reason those who think they are called by God have continued to establish churches in every street.

Lol. Don't you see that you've included yourself in that "problem", since greed is the problem that "Christians" have? Are you not a Christian? Lol.

Anyway, I quite understand where you're coming from - and I agree with you in part. Many people do Christian service out of "greed" and other problems which they haven't dealt with. And we should not think this is a new phenomenon - because the apostles were concerned as well. Just two examples:

(a) Not everyone is genuinely doing the proper thing:

2 Cor. 2:17
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God,
in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

Php. 1:16 & 17
The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defense of the gospel.

(b) Be warned - such people were prophesied to emerge in our day!

Acts 20:29 & 30
For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you,
not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things,
to draw away disciples after them.


The problem is not perculiar to any particular group or section of Christianity. Whether Catholics or Protestants, people have emerged to teach and do very shameful things. But we can rejoice that there are answers in God's WORD to satisfy the hearts of those who sincerely seek Him and thirst for His truth.

Cheers.

Everyone knows exactly how or when a particular denomination started-We know,for instance, that King Henry VIII was behind the Anglican Church and that Martin Luther was behind the Lutherans or that John Wesley was behind the Methodists.

Nobody seems to have a credible explanation about how the Catholic Church started.If it has nothing to do with the early Christian Church,then who started it,when and how?

I-man:

Everyone knows exactly how or when a particular denomination started-We know,for instance, that King Henry VIII was behind the Anglican Church and that Martin Luther was behind the Lutherans or that John Wesley was behind the Methodists.

Nobody seems to have a credible explanation about how the Catholic Church started.If it has nothing to do with the early Christian Church,then who started it,when and how?

Good! This is a question begging for answer, unfortunately, nobody has answered it but they will be fast enough to tell you that Catholic is not the true Church. I know Catholic follow Oral Traditions which the early Apostles instructed Christians to do, yet these our Protestant friends will question if they are in the bible. But who wrote the bible? You discover the simple answer to this question is given in one word - CATHOLIC.

ebos:

Good! This is a question begging for answer, unfortunately, nobody has answered it but they will be fast enough to tell you that Catholic is not the true Church. I know Catholic follow Oral Traditions which the early Apostles instructed Christians to do, yet these our Protestant friends will question if they are in the bible. But who wrote the bible? You discover the simple answer to this question is given in one word - CATHOLIC.

Expect them to be googling intensively.

What we use today as our Bible didn't even come into existence untill late in the 4th century .Untill then,there was great uncertainty about what books were valid and what wasn't.Prior to the 4th century,Christianity existed-nearly 400 years-without a Bible as we know it.New denominations to the Christian faith have nothing to fall back on.A Church that existed before the Bible will proceed differently.

@ jerrymania,

jerrymania:

Your posts are polite and sometimes enlightening but you don't ever reason reality on subjects like this. Faith and Reason move along.
Now you believe in the trinity. If a Church can be built upon Peter, that means he his the head of the church and christianity right? then the trinity wont be correct because Peter deserves a place in divinity. this task of heading the Church is a divine order don't you think so? That means we are witnessing quaterinity (yes foursome)!

Well, thanks for your compliments.

The fact is that I don't see Peter as the Head of the Church; for everywhere we look in Scripture, only Christ (and none else) is spoken of as Head of the Church (see Eph. 1:22; 4:15; Col. 1:18 ). Nowhere is it said that the Church (of even "a church" is built on Peter, for again Scripture declares that Christ is the foundation upon which the Church is being built (1 Cor. 3:11).

The Trinity is a solid Biblical truth regardless of what people may argue to the contrary.

Mary the mothr of Christ cannot replace Him even in intercession. I dont think Mary has more mercy than Christ

Beloved brethren, called to be saints.

For how long shall we continue in endless debates and arguments?

The fact that Jesus is the Head of the Church is not contestible anywhere.

Who are the members of His Church? Are they not those who are saved by Grace whose sins are washed in the pracious Blood of the Lamb that was shed for us all. Those whose names are written in the Book of Life, those who are either sleeing in Him waiting for the resurrection or those who are alive, labouring in His vine yard, who are also awaiting His coming.

The Lord is returning to take home a church without spot or wrinckle and may I ask here, have you been to Jesus for the cleansing power? Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb? Are your garment spackling white as snow?

The fact is, there is only one Book of Life and only one eternal life. In eternity, there is no Catholic church, Anglican church, Deeper life, Apostolic, Methodist, Penticostal, Charismatic, Evangelical, etc. Only one church, The Body of Christ with Christ as the Head.

There are chances that some people who are championing these arguments are yet to know the Saviuor and His Power to deliver from sin and death.

Now, let me ask, what shall it profit a man to "fight" for his church and miss out eternal life which is the real deal. Lord have mercy on us all.

www_pastor:

Now, let me ask, what shall it profit a man to "fight" for his church and miss out eternal life which is the real deal. Lord have mercy on us all.

Christians are called to "FIGHT" the good fight of faith:

1 Tim. 6:12
"Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses."

pilgrim.1:

Christians are called to "FIGHT" the good fight of faith:

1 Tim. 6:12
"Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses."

Thank God for 1 Tim 6: 12,

Fight the good fight of faith! how? By "fighting" for your church? No! By laying hold on eternal life which is found in Christ Jesus. The good fight of faith is to deny self and sin, and work in the light. By consistently laying down our liveing for the Master.

By preaching Christ and Him crucified which is the true Gospel. Yet, you did not really answer my questio: What will it profit a man to "fight" for his "church" and suffer the loss of His own soul?

www_pastor:


Thank God for 1 Tim 6: 12,

Fight the good fight of faith! how? By "fighting" for your church? No! By laying hold on eternal life which is found in Christ Jesus. The good fight of faith is to deny self and sin, and work in the light. By consistently laying down our liveing for the Master.

By preaching Christ and Him crucified which is the true Gospel. Yet, you did not really answer my questio: What will it profit a man to "fight" for his "church" and suffer the loss of His own soul?

We are also told search all things and lay hold of that whoch is true. The church you are has a great influence on your chances of knowing him and consequently pleasing him. You dont please him more than you know him. I stand to be corrected.

cgift:

We are also told search all things and lay hold of that whoch is true. The church you are has a great influence on your chances of knowing him and consequently pleasing him. You don't please him more than you know him. I stand to be corrected.

I do understand exactly what you mean, but let me tell you a secret (if it is really a secret), if you meet a church goer who does not know the Lord and you start attacking his church, he will either attack back or stay away from you.  On the other hand, if you preach the gospel (the pure gospel) and such a one repents, they might easily change church.  i am telling you from experience.

I have ministered to a Catholic without attacking her church.  She gave her life to Christ and left the church of her own accord.  If I had attacked her church, she might not listened to me.

The message of the cross is straight enough, let us keep our focus on Jesus.  It is well.

Actually, Protestants are not full Christians until they join the true Church of Christ (Catholic). Pope really made a good point. If you baptize in any of the Protestant Churches, and come back to the Catholic Church - you have to be baptised again so as to welcome you as a Christian. But if you baptise in Anglican, Methodist and I hope Lutheran Churches and join Catholic, we only accept you back in the Catholic Church, no new baptism needed, and their Pastors are counted as anointed men of God hence we know them as Pentecostants when classifying them . The Protestant Pastors are not anointed men of God. I believe this was the point Pope was trying to make, and he is right.

Every Body believes

Everyone believes
In how they think it ought to be
Everyone believes
And they're not going easily

Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword
Like punching under water
You never can hit who you're trying for

Some need the exhibition
And some have to know they tried

It's the chemical weapon
For the war that's raging on inside

Everyone believes
From emptiness to everything
Everyone believes
And no ones going quietly

We're never gonna win the world
We're never gonna stop the war
We're never gonna beat this
If belief is what we're fighting for

What puts a hundred thousand children in the sand
Belief can

What puts the folded flag inside his mother's hand
Belief can

Yes, you must believe in something; there is more to life than meets the eyes.