Why is Scientology kookier than the Catholic church?
Replies
-
Thank you. This is what I was expecting to be quoted. However, it merely takes turning to paragraph 847 (the immediately following paragraph to the one cited) to see how this statement is qualified and explained. The point is that Christ is the way of salvation and that the normal way Christ's salvation is received is through the word of God and sacraments but that those who do not have legitimate access or understanding of these realities may experience God's salvation through other means. Nothing here says that no one except Catholics will be saved nor does it suggest that a Catholic who does not understand his faith and leaves it will definitely go to hell. It is important that those who cite the Catechism be sure and read the context and all that the Catechism says on a given subject before drawing conclusions.The following is from the Catechism approved by the late Pope John Paul II:
"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
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.
The definition of 'knowing' would be important here, as would be the clarification that all who are not saved suffer hell.
Now the definition of 'understanding' is important.
I was raised with a traditional Lutheran teaching that those who heard the teaching of Christ yet rejected it are damned to hell.
However, someone could easily hear the words, even hear them all of their lives, and not understand them. So there's some wiggle room in the definition, as there almost always is with human language.
I've known people of various demoninations who hold to the traditional, stricter view, and people of various denominations who hold to a more merciful definition.0 -
Now the definition of 'understanding' is important.
I was raised with a traditional Lutheran teaching that those who heard the teaching of Christ yet rejected it are damned to hell.
However, someone could easily hear the words, even hear them all of their lives, and not understand them. So there's some wiggle room in the definition, as there almost always is with human language.
I've known people of various demoninations who hold to the traditional, stricter view, and people of various denominations who hold to a more merciful definition.
Exactly! And the Catechism recognizes the "wiggle room" and has a more merciful approach.0 -
So, let's see. This is a debate group, that I've been pretty active in and you disagree that my reply was warranted? On a subject that is important to me?That was covered, but whatever. I was fairly certain I said I disagreed with you that your reply was warranted.
Essentially yes. I've found nothing substantive in what you've said thus far because I find that it's entirely based on your inability to accept that someone else's view of Catholicism may differ from yours and be equally valid.
This thread isn't a something that's really all that debatable because it's an opinion. Even when you state that someone was saying something incorrect about Catholicism and "that's not what the Church teaches."
It seems that the Church did teach it to someone. The fact that it's not "official" in your estimation doesn't mean anything because we're talking about individual perspectives here. It's all fine and dandy to say "hey my experience with the Catholic Church says this, so it's interesting that you had such a different opinion." But no. You went to the "your view is wrong because the Church (by way of me) says something different."
How is that you participating in a debate again?0 -
This debate, if you will, is totally based on opinions. Everyone has got one. However, when someone is saying "the Church" teaches something that is false, I will debate that. I'm not disputing the fact that a priest may have told them that. I'm stating that priest was incorrect in doing so.This thread isn't a something that's really all that debatable because it's an opinion. Even when you state that someone was saying something incorrect about Catholicism and "that's not what the Church teaches."0 -
This debate, if you will, is totally based on opinions. Everyone has got one. However, when someone is saying "the Church" teaches something that is false, I will debate that. I'm not disputing the fact that a priest may have told them that. I'm stating that priest was incorrect in doing so.This thread isn't a something that's really all that debatable because it's an opinion. Even when you state that someone was saying something incorrect about Catholicism and "that's not what the Church teaches."
And? It doesn't change the fact that the Church taught it. The person who taught that represented the Church. The Church, Catholic or otherwise, can't rewrite history, or simply define murder away, for that matter, to suit its whims. Sometimes agents of the Church mess up. We're human and that's it's expected. But it gets to take accountability for that, instead of just saying, "oh well. We didn't approve that message."0 -
I'm gonna take a popcorn break here to enjoy the two Catholics duking it out over what the Jewish chick asserted about Catholic theology. Anyone know where I can get the animated macro?0
-
There is a huge difference between saying "the Catholic church" teaches this and "a Catholic church " teaches this. My correction was that the overarching Church never says if you're not Catholic you're going to hell.And? It doesn't change the fact that the Church taught it. The person who taught that represented the Church.0 -
This thread is a perfect example of how religion is at the root cause of most conflicts in the world.0
-
This thread is a perfect example of how religion is at the root cause of most conflicts in the world.
I agree!0 -
While I stated I agreed with TheRoadDog's statement, I'm going to add in my own opinion and experiences. Take it with a grain of salt, as every opinion should be.
I think ALL religions are kooky. That is my opinion. I DO, however, believe that all religions have a few things in common, which has cemented MY BELIEF in the existence of God and "A great teacher/sacrifice," no matter what name you choose to give both entities.
Now, a little side story: My grandmother was raised in the Catholic church. She went to Catholic schools as soon as she was old enough to attend to the day she graduated. She went through all the ceremonies, was given a catholic name, all that stuff. She remained in the Catholic Church until she met my grandfather. My grandfather was definitely not a catholic(He later became a preacher though.) My grandmother went to the church to get permission to marry a non-catholic. They refused her. She married him anyway, and they excommunicated her and told her that she had condemned herself and any children she might have to burn in hell with her husband. My mother still has the paperwork for all of this somewhere. I know this was close to a hundred years ago and that times might have changed, but that is kooky to me.0 -
While I stated I agreed with TheRoadDog's statement, I'm going to add in my own opinion and experiences. Take it with a grain of salt, as every opinion should be.
I think ALL religions are kooky. That is my opinion. I DO, however, believe that all religions have a few things in common, which has cemented MY BELIEF in the existence of God and "A great teacher/sacrifice," no matter what name you choose to give both entities.
Now, a little side story: My grandmother was raised in the Catholic church. She went to Catholic schools as soon as she was old enough to attend to the day she graduated. She went through all the ceremonies, was given a catholic name, all that stuff. She remained in the Catholic Church until she met my grandfather. My grandfather was definitely not a catholic(He later became a preacher though.) My grandmother went to the church to get permission to marry a non-catholic. They refused her. She married him anyway, and they excommunicated her and told her that she had condemned herself and any children she might have to burn in hell with her husband. My mother still has the paperwork for all of this somewhere. I know this was close to a hundred years ago and that times might have changed, but that is kooky to me.
I have a similar story. My first wife was Jewish. It didn't work out. We divorced and I met a nice Italian Catholic girl. Her family -- very active in the church -- wanted a big Italian Catholic Wedding. The Church said we could not get married in the Church, because I had been married previously.
However, after further consideration and because my future father-in-law donated quite generously to the church and was also the Choirmaster, they came across a loophole. My previous wife was Jewish; therefore, the Catholic Church didn't recognize that marriage; therefore, I was never married; therefore, I could be married in the Catholic Church.0 -
There is a huge difference between saying "the Catholic church" teaches this and "a Catholic church " teaches this. My correction was that the overarching Church never says if you're not Catholic you're going to hell.And? It doesn't change the fact that the Church taught it. The person who taught that represented the Church.
To you maybe. To the person receiving that message there may not be any difference at all and that's a valid stance to take. No sender of any form of communication has the luxury of fully controlling how information is received.0 -
Any sensible religion has wiggle room and loopholes big enough to drive a truck through. The reason for that is that life is complicated.
And to the jerks saying that religion is the primary source of conflicts in the world, how do you explain the Iran-Iraq War? The American Civil War? The War of Jenkins' Ear? Any war involving the USSR?0 -
Any sensible religion has wiggle room and loopholes big enough to drive a truck through. The reason for that is that life is complicated.
And to the jerks saying that religion is the primary source of conflicts in the world, how do you explain the Iran-Iraq War? The American Civil War? The War of Jenkins' Ear? Any war involving the USSR?
Jerks?
I'm rubber; You're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.0 -
I understand that, Evan. Good grief. I'm still correcting something that is incorrect, regardless of who said it. Suppose someone was reading this thread and read that comment about Catholics believing if you're not Catholic, you're going to hell. That's one more person that may believe that. So, I comment to make it clear that is not what "the" Church teaches. I'm still not sure why this has you so bothered. If you read a statement that you know to be false about something you're passionate about, I don't know why you wouldn't comment on it.To you maybe. To the person receiving that message there may not be any difference at all and that's a valid stance to take. No sender of any form of communication has the luxury of fully controlling how information is received.0 -
I disagree that religion is the primary cause of war. It's often used as the excuse, but the primary cause is resources.0
-
I understand that, Evan. Good grief. I'm still correcting something that is incorrect, regardless of who said it. Suppose someone was reading this thread and read that comment about Catholics believing if you're not Catholic, you're going to hell. That's one more person that may believe that. So, I comment to make it clear that is not what "the" Church teaches. I'm still not sure why this has you so bothered. If you read a statement that you know to be false about something you're passionate about, I don't know why you wouldn't comment on it.To you maybe. To the person receiving that message there may not be any difference at all and that's a valid stance to take. No sender of any form of communication has the luxury of fully controlling how information is received.
I think I get it now.you're literally incapable of understanding that the statement you consider false was not false to the person who made it. It doesn't matter what "the" church says on the subject because their surrogate, in the form of "a" church, communicated something different and that's what matters.
There's really not that large of a difference between a large organized religion and a chain restaurant. If I have terrible dining experience and tell the home office, and they apologize and say that is not how they do business, I'm inclined to argue because it obviously is how they do business.0 -
I think you are literally incapable of accepting that what a priest tells someone can be wrong. The statement "The Catholic Church teaches if you are not Catholic, you will go to hell" is a false statement. That does not mean it wasn't said to her by someone representing the Catholic church. I'm not denying that. Of course it was not false to the person who was told that by a priest. I'm not denying that. What is wrong with me telling her now that what that priest told her is incorrect?I think I get it now.you're literally incapable of understanding that the statement you consider false was not false to the person who made it.0 -
There's really not that large of a difference between a large organized religion and a chain restaurant. If I have terrible dining experience and tell the home office, and they apologize and say that is not how they do business, I'm inclined to argue because it obviously is how they do business.
Are you really suggesting that someone representing a restaurant, a church, a school, a group of people should be able to speak for the entire group, and the entire group should be held accountable? Just because a teacher teaches something that is false, does not mean that the school teaches it that way. Just because you receive bad service in a restaurant, does not mean that's how management expects service to be delivered. Just because a priest told someone they were going to hell does not mean the Catholic Church believes that. Just because RoadDog was allowed to marry someone in the Catholic church without receiving an nullity of marriage doesn't mean the overarching Church would have condoned that.0 -
I think you are literally incapable of accepting that what a priest tells someone can be wrong. The statement "The Catholic Church teaches if you are not Catholic, you will go to hell" is a false statement. That does not mean it wasn't said to her by someone representing the Catholic church. I'm not denying that. Of course it was not false to the person who was told that by a priest. I'm not denying that. What is wrong with me telling her now that what that priest told her is incorrect?I think I get it now.you're literally incapable of understanding that the statement you consider false was not false to the person who made it.
Your assumption that it matters for starters. Some bells you just don't get to un-ring.0
