Vatican's message to Buddhists puts Christ and Buddha on the same level

To the extent that the religion contains truth, it will lead a person to a saving knowledge of God.
Thank you for your admission. Then it doesn't matter what you believe. As long as you are sincere in your schismatic, heretic, or pagan religion, you don't need the Catholic Church.
As I said, I am no fan of Pope Francis. If I had to do a service with Buddhists, I would try to come up with something that is ecumenical enough that we can both agree to it, yet does not require either of us to assent to the things we disagree with. So I would not praise the religion or cheerlead for it, but I would be respectful as I expect of the Buddhist. "Do unto others" says Jesus. If I want the Buddhist to respect my beliefs, I must respect their beliefs, sir.
Thank you for your admission again. The fact that you would even consider doing "a service with Buddhists" shows your complete religious indifference; that you would do a joint religious ceremony with a pagan religion. Of course, you play organ for your Protestant church every week, so obviously, it matters very little to you.
I am not a universalist, sir. I believe that there are elements of Truth in all religions, but the fullness of Truth is in Catholicism. I do not believe all religions are equal, sir. I do not believe all religions equally express the Truth of God. A universalist would believe that.

I also do not believe all people are going to heaven, whereas a universalist would believe that. As for who is or is not going to heaven, however, that is between God and individuals. I have nothing to do with that.
You admit that Catholicism is totally unnecessary but is merely "fullness of truth." This is the heretical ecclesiology of Vatican II, anyone can be saved through any religion, and belief in Christ as the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is completely unnecessary.

Yeah, that's religious indifferentism.

Yeah--you never met a quote you didn't like, did you?
Yeah, it's only a "quote", only a papal encyclical, just magisterium. It has no relevance to you or your made-up religion of opinions. Catholic teaching means absolutely nothing to you. They are only a bunch of old irrelevant writings of some people that existed before Vatican II.

I am not saying we should not evangelize people with the Truth of the Gospel sir. At the same time I am not going to go Protestant fundamentalist and start Bible thumping either.

You sir, strike me of the Catholic equivalent of the Protestant fundamentalist. You take everything in an overly literal way and then start beating people over the heads with proof-texts, regardless of context.
Why would you even bother to "evangelize" non-Catholics when your fake Pachamama worshiping apostate "pope" says "proselytism" is evil? He certainly wouldn't try to convert the Buddhists or anyone else to his heretic Novus Ordo religion.
 
Thank you for your admission. Then it doesn't matter what you believe. As long as you are sincere in your schismatic, heretic, or pagan religion, you don't need the Catholic Church.
Do you believe that seeking Truth is a work of the Holy Spirit or not, sir?

We cannot seek truth, sincerely, unless the Holy Spirit moves us. And if someone is seeking Truth because the Holy Spirit moves them, shall they not find all they seek?
Thank you for your admission again. The fact that you would even consider doing "a service with Buddhists" shows your complete religious indifference; that you would do a joint religious ceremony with a pagan religion.
What should I do? Tell them to go to Hell?
Of course, you play organ for your Protestant church every week, so obviously, it matters very little to you.
Sir, if it didn't matter to me, I would be Protestant. Boy they have great hymns though--traditional Protestantism that is. I am not talking about contemporary worship. If there is one thing traditional reformed Protestants do well it is hymnody.
You admit that Catholicism is totally unnecessary but is merely "fullness of truth."
I didn't say it is unnecessary. Without the Church there is no salvation.
This is the heretical ecclesiology of Vatican II, anyone can be saved through any religion, and belief in Christ as the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is completely unnecessary.
This is not my ecclesiology, nor that of Vatican II. That is your rad trad caricature.
Yeah, that's religious indifferentism.
Sure is--for the people who hold to it.
Yeah, it's only a "quote", only a papal encyclical, just magisterium. It has no relevance to you or your made-up religion of opinions. Catholic teaching means absolutely nothing to you. They are only a bunch of old irrelevant writings of some people that existed before Vatican II.
Writings, sir, that have to be situated in their historical context. Writings sir, that were written to address specific questions about specific items.

Your problem is that you take specific statements made by popes, to address specific questions and controversies--and then you force them to answer modern questions they weren't intended to address.
Why would you even bother to "evangelize" non-Catholics when your fake Pachamama worshiping apostate "pope" says "proselytism" is evil?
Sir, "proselytism" is a form of Bible thumping. I have seen this in videos. A Protestant minister goes to Mass and then interrupts the Mass and yells at everyone, telling them they are going to Hell. A Protestant or group of Protestants who stand outside Catholic churches and yell at worshippers. That happened at a Church I went to Mass at once. I went over to the person to talk to him and distract him. Alpha and Omega ministries goes to Salt Lake City to proselytize Mormons who are there to worship. THAT, sir, is what the pope has in mind when he condemns "proselytism."

"Do unto others." Protestants would not want us at their churches doing that. James White would not want Mormons at his Church doing that. There is a difference between evangelization out of love, and just wanting to be right. Bible Thumpers are not about evangelization. At best they just like to show off and draw attention to themselves, showing how much they think they know. At worst, they do so out of hate.
He certainly wouldn't try to convert the Buddhists or anyone else to his heretic Novus Ordo religion.
Sir, there is a time and a place for everything.
 
Then it doesn't matter what you believe. As long as you are sincere in your schismatic, heretic, or pagan religion,....
No, he said "To the extent that the religion contains truth." Being sincere is not sufficient if the thing you are sincere in does not contain truth.


The fact that you would even consider doing "a service with Buddhists" shows your complete religious indifference;
Your opinion is wrong. Doing things with people other than Catholics is not a sign of indifference.

Of course, you play organ for your Protestant church every week, so obviously, it matters very little to you.
Playing organ for a Protestant church is not an admission of assent to all their religious beliefs, nor is it a renunciation of Catholic beliefs.

You admit that Catholicism is totally unnecessary but is merely "fullness of truth."
He admitted no such thing.

This is the heretical ecclesiology of Vatican II, anyone can be saved through any religion, and belief in Christ as the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is completely unnecessary.
That is a misrepresentation of the documents of Vatican II.

Why would you even bother to "evangelize" non-Catholics when your "pope" says "proselytism" is evil?
The meaning of the word "proselytism" once had a neutral meaning but it has evolved to connote a more sinister meaning that is very different from "evangelize". "Proselytism" is what Islamic extremists do when they threaten a people under their power to convert to Islam or die. "Evangelism" is what the first century Christians did by proclaiming the Gospel without the use of worldly power and coercion. It is this evil form of Proselytism that Pope Francis calls evil for its use of worldly power and coercion.
 
The fact that you would even consider doing "a service with Buddhists" shows your complete religious indifference;
Doing things with people other than Catholics is not a sign of indifference.

Funny how "doing a service" is changed to simply "doing things" to take the edge off.

Kinda like some people some where did some things on 9/11.
 
It is not every day I find myself in agreement with a sedevacantist. How can false religion contain truth? Jesus Christ is the Truth. If a religion does not contain Christ, it does not contain truth.
That's false logic. If a religion does not contain Christ it does not contain all the truth, but it can contain some of the truth. (e.g. Judaism)
 
Sir, if it didn't matter to me, I would be Protestant. Boy they have great hymns though--traditional Protestantism that is. I am not talking about contemporary worship. If there is one thing traditional reformed Protestants do well it is hymnody.
The modern Protestant services are attempting to be relevant to the younger crowd, but the music always ends up sounding like a dirge.
I didn't say it is unnecessary. Without the Church there is no salvation.

This is not my ecclesiology, nor that of Vatican II. That is your rad trad caricature.

Sure is--for the people who hold to it.

Writings, sir, that have to be situated in their historical context. Writings sir, that were written to address specific questions about specific items.

Your problem is that you take specific statements made by popes, to address specific questions and controversies--and then you force them to answer modern questions they weren't intended to address.

Sir, "proselytism" is a form of Bible thumping. I have seen this in videos. A Protestant minister goes to Mass and then interrupts the Mass and yells at everyone, telling them they are going to Hell. A Protestant or group of Protestants who stand outside Catholic churches and yell at worshippers.
Do you have any links?
That happened at a Church I went to Mass at once. I went over to the person to talk to him and distract him. Alpha and Omega ministries goes to Salt Lake City to proselytize Mormons who are there to worship. THAT, sir, is what the pope has in mind when he condemns "proselytism."
Sounds like these people are taking their queue from the Westboro Baptists.
"Do unto others." Protestants would not want us at their churches doing that. James White would not want Mormons at his Church doing that. There is a difference between evangelization out of love, and just wanting to be right.
There's a fine line, and it isn't always easy to tell which side one is on sometimes. There was an interview with Penn Jillette who when asked about evangelism assumed that they were sincere in their intent to convert others to save them from eternal damnation. Perhaps he's a bit naive. Evangelism is only the first step in a long process of conforming to their rules, dogmas, doctrines etc. etc. etc.
Bible Thumpers are not about evangelization. At best they just like to show off and draw attention to themselves, showing how much they think they know. At worst, they do so out of hate.
One way to tell the difference is to simply agree with whatever they're spewing and ask for address and directions to their church, service times, etc. etc.
 
Funny how "doing a service" is changed to simply "doing things" to take the edge off.
No, it is simply a generalization. Doing a service with members of another religion is just one of many possible things you could do with people from another religion without violating your own. Others include cooperating in a project to do charitable works for the less fortunate in your town, singing Christmas carols, etc. You really are grasping at straws.
 
That does not answer my question concerning your highly peculiar phrase "saving knowledge of God." Since when does knowledge save us?
When that knowledge leads to a relationship with Jesus Christ. I believe such a relationship can be implicit or explicit.

In other words--we can know Christ without necessarily being able to articulate that we know Him. Knowledge of Jesus is revealed in one's life, not ones words.
 
When that knowledge leads to a relationship with Jesus Christ. I believe such a relationship can be implicit or explicit.

In other words--we can know Christ without necessarily being able to articulate that we know Him. Knowledge of Jesus is revealed in one's life, not ones words.

Yeah. That is how the priests and nuns explained how Christ rejecting atheists are saved in Catholicism.

If they are "good people," they magically know Jesus Christ and have a relationship with Him...even though they publicly deny all faith in Jesus Christ.

This is how Catholics all over the world tell unbelievers they do not need to put their faith in Jesus Christ in order to be saved. They may be saved already, right?

LOL.
 
That's a little like an analogy that I sometimes use about false teaching: if you have a cake with 99% wholesome ingredients, and 1% cyanide, would you eat the cake because it's mostly fine?
That is a good analogy and NO I wouldn't. I mean how would you know where the cyanide is, it would contaminate the whole and make it all unedible. Just like those false RC teachings, claims and practices and their love of pagan services and artifacts.
 
-------The Daughters of the Zidonians-------

Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Zidonians,
and went and served Baal, and worshipped him.-------

Another parable spake he unto them;
The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven,
which
a woman took,
and hid in three measures of meal,
till the whole was leavened
.

Lk.11:27​
---Just a Plantin them Mustards----​
And it came to pass, as he spake these things,​
a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice,​
and said unto him,​
Blessed is the womb that bare thee,
and the paps which thou hast sucked.​

----seeds planted will reap a harvest---

Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee,
because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel,
which calleth herself a prophetess,
to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication,
and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
 
When that knowledge leads to a relationship with Jesus Christ. I believe such a relationship can be implicit or explicit.

In other words--we can know Christ without necessarily being able to articulate that we know Him. Knowledge of Jesus is revealed in one's life, not ones words.
Well gosh, there you have it! Romish the Roman Catholic, boldly informs us that actually Jesus Christ really never needed to rely on the risky notion of speaking one word in His ministry here on earth. romish informs us that knowledge about Jesus Christ was revealed in life, and not in His words.
 
Back
Top