Pope: Other Christians Not True Churches

[Amelia]

Pope: Other Christians Not True Churches

By NICOLE WINFIELD

Associated Press Writer

10 July, 2007

LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy (AP) -- Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.

Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church.

On Saturday, Benedict revisited another key aspect of Vatican II by reviving the old Latin Mass. Traditional Catholics cheered the move, but more liberal ones called it a step back from Vatican II.

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

In the latest document - formulated as five questions and answers - the Vatican seeks to set the record straight on Vatican II's ecumenical intent, saying some contemporary theological interpretation had been "erroneous or ambiguous" and had prompted confusion and doubt.

It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which set off a firestorm of criticism among 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."

In the new document and an accompanying commentary, which were released as the pope vacations here in Italy's Dolomite mountains, the Vatican repeated that position.

"Christ 'established here on earth' only one church," the document said. 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.

The Rev. Sara MacVane of the Anglican Centre in Rome, said there was nothing new in the document.

"I don't know what motivated it at this time," she said. "But it's important always to point out that there's the official position and there's the huge amount of friendship and fellowship and worshipping together that goes on at all levels, certainly between Anglican and Catholics and all the other groups and Catholics."

The document said Orthodox churches were indeed "churches" because they have apostolic succession and that they enjoyed "many elements of sanctification and of truth." But it said they lack something because they do not recognize the primacy of the pope - a defect, or a "wound" that harmed them, it said.

"This is obviously not compatible with the doctrine of primacy which, according to the Catholic faith, is an 'internal constitutive principle' of the very existence of a particular church," the commentary said.

Despite the harsh tone of the document, it stresses that Benedict remains committed to ecumenical dialogue.

"However, if such dialogue is to be truly constructive, it must involve not just the mutual openness of the participants but also fidelity to the identity of the Catholic faith," the commentary said.

The document, signed by the congregation prefect, U.S. Cardinal William Levada, was approved by Benedict on June 29, the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul - a major ecumenical feast day.

There was no indication about why the pope felt it necessary to release the document, particularly since his 2000 document summed up the same principles. Some analysts suggested it could be a question of internal church politics, or that it could simply be an indication of Benedict using his office as pope to again stress key doctrinal issues from his time at the congregation.

[Woody]

Quote:

It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which set off a firestorm of criticism among 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."

Quote:

"Christ 'established here on earth' only one church," the document said. The other communities "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense"

WOW !! This really hits home. It sounds SO familiar. Doesn't it?

[olger]

A little lady wrote that this was coming, and many laughed at her.

[Woody]

Well Olger ... that is an interesting concept. It may be true ... but it was not what I was referring to. I will let others guess as to what I was referring to.

[Kountzer]

This is the lead story right now on the Houston Chronicle's website, and I knew that this msg board would be all over this topic.

[Woody]

Yes D Bishop. But this is not new. I have heard others saying there is only one church for many years.

[Halfstep-Denise]

Thanks Amelia!

I read this news item on the CNN website about 30 minutes ago and my hair just about stood on end! My first reaction was "here we go"!

Halfstep-Denise

[Bravus]

Huh? I thought the little lady talked about an alliance between Catholicism and 'apostate protestantism'. Surely this is a move *away* from that?

[olger]

"Come to Mother.."

[Bravus]

mmkay, so increasing closeness and ecumenism after Vatican II was a sign of the coming end because the churches were aligning, and now more alienation and separation is also a sign of the end. Is there anything that can happen that isn't?

[Neil D]

Regarding the Pope and EGW and her mentioning "... more alienation and separation is also a sign of the end."

Quote:

Is there anything that can happen that isn't?

The Pope becomes protestant...? :S

[John317]

Regarding the Pope and EGW and her mentioning "... more alienation and separation is also a sign of the end."

Quote:

Is there anything that can happen that isn't?

The Pope becomes protestant...? :S

In putting out this recent statement, the pope is only repeating what the Roman Catholic Church has always taught and always will teach. It's an essential part of her official doctrines and can be found in any comprehensive Roman Catholic catechism or encyclopedia. In any change, it is always the protestants who are expected to change in their relationship to Catholicism. And most Protestant churches have changed a great deal in the last hundred or so years. One of the significant changes may been seen in the popular Protestant understanding of last-day events, the rapture, etc.

Ellen White didn't say that Protestants will all return to Catholicism. Most protestants will remain Protestant in name and keep their denomination's organization but will eventually follow the lead of the Pope in key areas, particularly in the keeping of Sunday. Ellen White's view of the end time means that all Protestants, except for those who continue to keep all the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, will ultimately acknowledge the authority of the Pope, which many already do in the matter of speaking for the Christian church to the non-Christian world.

[beekind]

Regarding the Pope and EGW and her mentioning "... more alienation and separation is also a sign of the end."

Quote:

Is there anything that can happen that isn't?

The Pope becomes protestant...? :S

Yeah wouldn't that be perfect as "the image to the beast"

[Woody]

Quote:

it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation."

Quote:

"Christ 'established here on earth' only one church," the document said. The other communities "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense"

Of all the nerve ... to say there is ONLY ONE church by which we can be saved. Who does the pope think he is ???!!!

[Amelia]

Quote:

Who does the pope think he is ???!!!

The Pope

[aldona]

but...doesn't he know...

the One True Church which is the only church through which people can be saved, is the SDA church??!!

At least that's what I was taught from my infancy...

aldona

[Jeannieb43]

Aldona, I grew up in that type of surroundings, too. My parents were very rigid and legalistic in their SDA worship practice. But I realize now that was the only way they knew! Before my mother died she said "I only wish I'd known this larger view of God and His loving style, when you kids were young."

I think our church is growing and "reinventing Adventism," as one of our favorite pastors has phrased it. A faith based on grace, not works.

Of course, there are still some "leftovers" from the old forensic model (and some of them are even running our schools).

[John317]

Aldona, I grew up in that type of surroundings, too. My parents were very rigid and legalistic in their SDA worship practice. But I realize now that was the only way they knew! Before my mother died she said "I only wish I'd known this larger view of God and His loving style, when you kids were young."

I think our church is growing and "reinventing Adventism," as one of our favorite pastors has phrased it. A faith based on grace, not works.

Of course, there are still some "leftovers" from the old forensic model (and some of them are even running our schools).

Would you please describe what the SDA Church will look like, at least to you or to your pastor, when the "reinventing" of Adventism is accomplished?

For instance, will the the basic SDA doctrines be the same as they are today?

[John317]

but...doesn't he know...

the One True Church which is the only church through which people can be saved, is the SDA church??!!

At least that's what I was taught from my infancy...

aldona

It's true some people got that impression, and maybe some misinformed people said things like that, but that was never what the church itself believed or taught (although it may be true some local churches communcated the message badly and maybe some pastors or elders did not understand the SDA doctrines.)

The thing is that a lot of young people and even many adults aren't really listening to what is being taught or written, so they often come away with mistaken ideas, yet these they claim are what the church teaches. Relatively few people show real initiative and drive in studying exactly what it is that the church does teach-- and what's more important, what the Bible teaches.

For instance, the SDA church has always taught that most of God's people are among the the non-SDA churches, not excluding the Catholic Church. Most of those among the saved in heaven will be people who kept Sunday and knew nothing about the Sabbath. The SDA church believes in the church universal that includes people from all faiths and all periods who truly put their faith in Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. This does not conflict with church's belief that just before Christ returns, God has raised up a church that is to give a special message to the world-- called the Third Angel's Message-- in order to help people prepare to be sealed with the Seal of God and go through the Seven Last Plagues and be ready for translation.

The problem is, though, that kids rarely hear these things. They usually just hear about how people are lost if they don't accept the Adventist message, and this is what sticks in their minds. Kids are usually too immature to understand subtle differences between, for instance, those who hear the message and reject it even though they are under the conviction by the Holy Spirit, and those who have never really heard the message at all.

I'm not saying these things apply to you personally because I don't know anything about your experience. Perhaps you would like to describe what that was like.

[Robert]

...the pope

You mean the legalist of legalists! And you thought I was going to be nice, didn't you? teehe

[Robert]

but...doesn't he know...

the One True Church which is the only church through which people can be saved, is the SDA church??!!

At least that's what I was taught from my infancy...

aldona

Now you're in trouble!

[Robert]

This is good, real good!

[Woody]

I was just wondering ... does the SDA church still believe that the Pope is AntiChrist?

I guess it would only be fair ... if he doesn't think we are true churches ... maybe it is because we think HE is AntiChrist.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Amelia

...the pope

You mean the legalist of legalists! And you thought I was going to be nice, didn't you? teehe

What!!!? I thought you had reserved that title to me!!!

Gerry

[Gerr]

I was just wondering ... does the SDA church still believe that the Pope is AntiChrist?

I guess it would only be fair ... if he doesn't think we are true churches ... maybe it is because we think HE is AntiChrist.

There were antichrists in John the Apostle's day. So the Pope cannot be the antichrist. He is merely the eminent one among many. Who else claims to be the "Vicar of Christ?"

Vicar = substitute

Antichrist = in place of Christ

The antichrist nonpareil is of course, Satan, who will try to impersonate the Lord Himself just before He comes.

Yeah, the wound of 1798 has been completely healed. And now the dragon has begun to stir and rear its head!

Gerry