hinduwoman

This just came to me when I was thinking about Catholics and Protestants.

According to the creed, a Christian is whoever professes faith in Christ.

Yet Protestants and Catholics both say that the other is not a true Christian. (Yes I know that some do not think in that way but this was true for most of their history and even today for many.).
There are many differences between the two doctrines, but the principal one is whether Pope is the head of the Church or not.

That the other party accepts Christ as the saviour is apparently not important: if they accept/not accept the Pope as their leader then they are not real Christians.

So the Pope is more important than Christ in deciding who is a Christian.
:angel:

Catholic Convert

As a Catholic, I will say that Protestants are Christians, even though I do not believe they embrace the "fullness of Christianity." But some Protestants (not most) will not return the favor.

Catholics accept that the Pope is the head of the Church, a successor to Peter, orignially appointed by Jesus.

We believe as much in Jesus as the Protestants, but believe he gave us visible representatives of himself and the apostles, in the pope and bishops.

We do not hold it against the Protestants that they do not understand our faith. Some of them hold our belief in the papacy against us, however.

But we both agree Jesus is the true head of the Church, and that he is the focus of our faith.

ekl

I would say that it seems the Pope is more important than Jesus for a lot of people. Jesus had a number of teachings that the Vatican blatantly ignores.

For example, Jesus said that if you have more than you need you're stealing (which of course means you're not abiding by that particular commandment) and yet the Pope presides over the Catholic Church, which is one of the richest organisations in the world. You can walk into most Catholic churches and say, without doubt, that they have more than they need. So they're stealking. The Pope, as their leader, is not living by the teachings of Jesus, and yet has the support of vast numbers of people who supposedly believe in Jesus without reserve.

There are also questions about whether Jesus meant Peter to be the leader of his church. There are a lot of books out there on that subject, which in some cases present quite compelling evidence.

So, I didn't quite respond to your post, but I think it's a valid response to the original question

Ojuice5001

One answer a Catholic might give is that the Church is the body of Christ. So accepting Christ and accepting his body are inseperable from each other. Many Catholics, but not all, interpret "the Church" to exclude Protestants. By that interpretation, Protestants are rejecting Christ's body, and this would have implications for their acceptance of Christ himself.

hinduwoman

Thank you Catholic Convert for proving my point.

Protestants have not embraced the fullness of Christ because they refuse the Pope. In other words, it is not belief in Christ that determines their status but belief in Pope and his infallibility.

Thor Q. Mada

Sorry to disagree. The pope is not more important than christ. But the organization is more important than anything else.They want to become bigger an bigger at all cost and hold or better increase their power.
The goal of the church is not salvation but merely self-perpetuation.
If you look at their actions in that light, you will understand more and more.

Jehanne

Clearly, from Saint Augustine onwards, the Church taught that anyone who had a valid, Christian baptism was subject to the judgment of the Church. In the mid-1800s, the idea of “invincible ignorance�? arose, which Saint Pope Pius IX gave formal approval to. The great theologian Karl Rahner, the architect of Vatican II, would develop the idea of an “anonymous Christian�? as even including atheists of “good will�?!

BSM

Catholic Convert, please define "fullness of Christianity". In addition, if you do not hold it against them then why does the Church make these statements?

Excerpts from Dominus Jesus:

Who would want to return the favor when the "Mother Church" uses these terms to describe them?

*are not Churches in the proper sense
*albeit imperfect
*they suffer from defects

An insult is an insult no matter how much double-speak you use to dress it up.

~BSM

Jehanne

Check these out:

http://www.catholicism.org/eens.html

BSM

Two comments:

1) Regarding Jehanne's post - why am I not surprised?

2) Regarding Catholicism from an atheistic perspective - it has been my personal experience that most Catholics I know are much more tolerant (and less preachy) of non-believer's than their Protestant counter parts. Heck, my wife completed her intership at a small Catholic University and the priests and nuns were extremely nice and tolerant.

Oddly enough though, when I was a Lutheran I dated an almost-nun (don't ask) and I was discriminated against by her mother--that whole Catholic-Lutheran thing I suppose.

I wonder if Catholics get more dogmatic the higher (and closer) you get to the church heirarchy? Read: Rome and authority.

So in relation to Catholic Convert I wonder if he/she is aware of some of the Church's dogma? Or, is this something that is largely confined to the bishops and cardinals? I.e., the laity does not question (or look very hard at) all the documents, edicts, and rulings that trickle down from Rome.

~BSM