PAINFUL TRUTH: OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION!

Blessed Pope Pius IX

Father Michael Müller: Questions and Answers on Salvation

by Father Michael Müller, C.SS.R.

Source: Catholic Family News

www.cfnews.org

CFN Editor’s Note: Father Michael Müller was one of the most widely read theologians of the 19th Century. He ranks as one of the greatest defenders of the dogma “Outside the Church there is no salvation” in modern times. Father Müller always submitted his works to two Redemptorist theologians and to his religious superiors before publication, thus we are sure of the doctrinal soundness of his teachings. This article, first published in 1875, is one of the finest treatments of the doctrinal truth that Our Lord founded one true Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. Father Muller’s firm writings are desperately needed in our time when this doctrine is denied by those who are the most influential members of our Holy Church. We publish Father Müller’s excellent little Catechism as an antidote to the prevalent religious indifferentism — an indifferentism that is the direct result of what Blessed Pius IX denounced as “Liberal Catholicism”.

1. Do all admit that the Catholic Church is the first and the oldest Church, and, consequently the Church established by Jesus Christ?

That the Catholic Church is the first and oldest and consequently the Church established by Jesus Christ, is and must be admitted by all, because it is a fact clearly proven by Scripture and by history.

2. Who bear witness to this fact?

The Jews and the Gentiles bear witness to it, and even Protestants themselves acknowledge it, because, if asked why they call themselves Protestants, they answer: “Because we protest against the Catholic Church.”

3. What follows from this answer?

That the Catholic Church is older than Protestantism; otherwise they could not have protested against her.

4. If we go still further back and ask the Greek Church how they came into existence, what will be their answer?

The Greek Church must answer: “We began by separating from the Catholic Church in the 9th Century.”

5. What follows from this?

That the Catholic Church existed for eight hundred years before the Greek Church began, and consequently, it is older than the Greek Church.

6. If we thus go back to the very days of the Apostles, what do we find everywhere in regard to the manner in which religious sects arose?

If we go back to the days of the Apostles, we find that every sect separated from the Catholic Church, and therefore we see Calvinists, Kilhamites, Quakers, Shakers, Panters, Seekers, Jumpers, Reformed Methodists, German Methodists, Wesleyan Methodists, Baptists, Particular Baptists, Hardshell Baptists, Softshell Baptists, Forty- Gallon Baptists, Sixty- Gallon Baptists, Mennonites, Millerites, Universalists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Mormons, Christian Perfectionists, etc., etc., etc.

7. Is it not all the same to God whatever religion a person professes?

If it were all the same to God whatever religion a person professes, God would not have forbidden, in the First Commandment, to worship Him in any other than in the true religion. Nor would Christ have solemnly declared: “He who will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican.” (Matt. 18:17)

8. Who, then, will be saved?

Christ has solemnly declared that only those will be saved who have done God’s will on earth as explained, not by private interpretation, but by the infallible teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. “Not everyone,” says Christ, “who saith to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doth the will of My Father Who is in Heaven, he shall enter the kingdom of Heaven.” (Matt. 7:21) The will of the heavenly Father is that all men hear and believe His Son, Jesus Christ. “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him.” (Luke 9:35)

Now Jesus Christ said to His Apostles and to all their lawful successors: “He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him, the heavenly Father, that sent Me.” Hence all those who do not listen to Jesus Christ speaking to them through Saint Peter and the Apostles in their lawful successors, despise God the Father. They do not do His will, and therefore Heaven will never be theirs.

Letter to Pasugo: Why "Church of Christ" is Accurate

Here is another letter sent by a reader of Pasugo, INC's official magazine.

PASUGO/May 1994 | Volume 46 | Number 5 | ISSN 0116-1636 | Page 3 Why “Church of Christ” is Accurate I AM AN avid reader of Pasugo. It is really interesting, convincing and I admire it so much. By the way, like your many readers, I also have questions in my mind. It is about the mention of “Church of God” in most versions of the Bible instead of “Church of Christ.” I have noticed that whenever you refer to Acts 20:28 you always cite George Lamsa’s version which mentions “Church of Christ instead of “Church of God.” Well, why did Mr.Lamsa change the original version? Is he authorized to change the original version? Elgee Guzman Nueva Ecija Philippines Editor’s Reply: Acts 20:28 in the George M. Lamsa version of the Bible reads: “Take heed therefore to yourselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers to feed the church of Christ which he has purchased with his blood.” Lamsa’s version which mentions “church of Christ is accurate because the one who actually shed His blood for the Church of Christ. God, being a spirit (Jn. 4:24), has no flesh and bones (Lk. 24:36-39) and thus has no blood. Other versions of the Bible that render the same portion of Acts 20:28 as “church of God” are not accurate for God has no blood. The Bible lists several names for the one Church built by Christ. It is called “Church of God” (I Thess. 2:14), “Church of the living God” (I Tim. 3:15). This Church of God is also of Christ because whatever is of God is also of Christ (Jn. 16:15; 17:9-10). It is called the Church of the Lord (Acts 20:28, American Standard Version) but the Lord referred to here is the one who shed His own blood for this church and this is the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2:36) who washed the members of the Church with His own blood (Rev. 1:5). Many Bible versions are done by people with a set of beliefs already in mind and this influenced their versions, thus changing the words of God. God’s words must not be made to contradict one another for God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33).

The biblical "church of Christ" is accurate but the INC's interpretation of the "church of Christ" which they love to translate to Tagalog (para magkatunog) "Iglesia ni Cristo" is NOT!

1. "church of Christ" (Acts 20:28 Lamsa Translation)

2. "churches of Christ" (Romans 16:16)

3. "Church of Christ" (Pasugo magazine in reference to Acts 20:28 quoting Lamsa's)

4. "Church of Christ" (Pasugo magazine in reference to Romans 16:16)

See the BIIIIG difference?!

In the Philippines where there are more than 78% of Catholics we also have a lot of IGNORANT ones. These ignorant Catholics are the easiest prey!

Much to our own frustration as Catholics is that these ignorant Catholics are CONTENTED on what was told them by Manalo's Church paid ministers. And when they finally embraced Manalo and his church, they become the fiercest anti-Catholics in the Philippines!

However, if you listen INTELLIGENTLY it is extremely DECEIVING to believe that when we say "church of Christ" or "Church of Christ" we mean exactly the same with the "Iglesia ni Cristo" of Manalo?

READ: Iba pang mga "churches of Christ" Iglesia ni Cristo rin kaya sila?

Manalo's INC Church CLAIMS every word "church(es) of Christ" being mentioned in Bible. They also CLAIM every time Catholic acknowledges the "Church of Christ" in its official pronouncements as THEM. Simply they translate "Church of Christ" (in reference to the Catholic Church) to Tagalog "Iglesia ni Cristo" so they conclude that the Catholic Church believes in the "Iglesia ni Cristo"

BUT why they are not CLAIMING every "Church of Christ" being registered in the United States as THEIRS?

At this time, you should be asking intelligently WHY?

ON LAMSA's ACTS 20:28

First you should be asking, Why only Acts 20:28 in Lamsa?  Who is GEORGE LAMSA? Is he a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo?

No!

George Lamsa is NOT a member of MANALO's Church.  During his lifetime, Mr. Lamsa never heard of the Iglesia ni Cristo or even met Felix Manalo or any of the Manalo's in that respect alone. Lamsa for sure never acknowledged the claims of Manalo as the "Last Messenger."

Just as what this Pasugo Editor said "Many Bible versions are done by people with a set of beliefs already in mind and this influenced their versions, thus changing the words of God," George Lamsa's person version was INFLUENCED by his SET OF BELIEFS already in his mind.

Thus Lamsa's changing of the word "God" to "Christ" made to contradict God's word.

True, as Pasugo Editor said "God’s words must not be made to contradict one another for God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33)" however Lamsa's OWN distorted Bible version REFLECTS a god of CONFUSION, now being COPIED by the INC of Manalo --COPY-CAT (walang originality) church!

Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo is sowing MORE CONFUSION nowadays having CONTRADICTING teachings, one teaching against another!

Yes, George Lamsa belongs to the ASSYRIAN CHURCH of the EAST which is HISTORICALLY an offshoot of NESTORIANISM.

Netorius was the heretical Bishop of Constantinople. His theology clearly showed that he DID NOT BELIEVE in the DEITY of Christ.  A doctrine COPIED by the INC of Manalo!

His theology was CONDEMNED by the CHURCH at the First Council of Ephesus in the year 431 A.D., 1,581 years before Felix Manalo thought he founded his Church in 1914.

We should not be confused NESTORIANISM from ARIANISM.  Nestorius was the Bishop of the See of Constantinople (Turkey) while Arius was the Bishop of See of Alexandria (Egypt).  Both were considered HERETICS by the CHURCH.

Here is something worth PONDERING:

(For Historical Records: Among the FIVE Ancient Apostolic Sees (Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, Jerusalem, and Rome -- ONLY ROME is still standing.  Rome is the SEE of PETER, LEADER of all the Churches. All other ancient See of Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople and Jerusalem have lost their Sees eventually from invading Muslims and their cities nowadays are governed and controlled by Islam -- Rome indeed is the ETERNAL CITY chosen by God) for Christians!

During the time of INC's "Last Messenger" Felix Manalo, he was quoting ONLY Romans 16:16.  Lamsa's version was unknown to him.  Therefore, Lamsa's Acts 20:28 does not serve any benefit to Manalo's Church today since Lamsa NEVER acknowledged the Iglesia ni Cristo as historically the true Church.

For Lamsa, the true Church is the Assyrian Church of the East.

Today Christians in general DO NOT consider Lamsa's Version as scholarly accurate and faithful to the original Scriptures.  His Acts 20:28 which was originally written as "church of God" was deliberately changed to "church of Christ" for according to him, the Scripture should be in error since "God do not have blood", therefore it should be Christ's.-- "church of Christ."

But the Bible says "church of God" in Acts 20:28

Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the holy Spirit has appointed you overseers,  in which you tend the church of God that he acquired with his own blood.

Because the same author, St. Paul believed too, that Jesus is God in the flesh (and blood)!

(Jesus) coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance..." Phil. 2:7

Jesus - in HUMAN LIKENESS, in HUMAN APPEARANCE, therefore Acts 20:28 is ACCURATELY written as "church of God"!

He was found to have abused the Scripture asserting his heretical theological stand according to "Nestorianism" which had been CONDEMNED 1,581 years as of this year 2012 AD.

ON ROMANS 16:16

Romans 16:16 has nothing to do with Manalo's founded Church-- the Iglesia ni Cristo.

READ: Alin ang Iglesiang binabati ng lahat ng mga iglesia ni Cristo?

"Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet YOU (emphasis mine)."

In Romans 16:16, the Bible confirms that "all the churches of Christ (ang lahat ng mga iglesia ni Cristo) were sending their greetings to YOU!

Who are these YOU being mentioned in Romans 16:16?

It's not the "Iglesia ni Cristo" in the Philippines rather, it's the CHURCH in ROME.

And that ALL THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST should be sending their greetings to "YOU"!

So if you think intelligently, you would be QUESTIONING the INC of Manalo why they are NOT SENDING its greetings to the (Church of ROME)?

ON INC's Biblical Reference about Christ being a Special Man and NOT God (Phil. 2: 9-11)

Manalo's INC Church usually finds CONVENIENTLY verses from the Bible which prove JESUS as a MAN only.

But then, from the same Bible, they cannot find any verse that DENIES His divinity as well.

So in order for them to justify their flawed logic and distorted theology, they said JESUS is not JUST an ORDINARY man but a very SPECIAL man.

To prove that, they claimed PHILIPPIANS 2:9-11.

READ: Iglesia ni Cristo's LIES and DECEIT

In VERSE 9, it begins with "... Because of this...."

Here is what they DON'T like you to read!

Verses 5-8

"...though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human  in appearance, he humbled himself..."

Philippians 2 CONFIRMS the DEITY of JESUS, saying JESUS is in the FORM of GOD, something we should GRASPED at. The Bible says JESUS CAME in HUMAN LIKENESS and JESUS God in HUMAN APPEARANCE!

Manalo's INC Church is a TOTAL absurdity and DEFECTIVE, HERETICAL and un-BIBLICAL.  The Iglesia ni Cristo is a FAKE church, founded by a man who PROCLAIMED himself as "God's Last Prophet".

Believe!

LEAVE the Iglesia ni Cristo at once and redeem yourself through his TRUE CHURCH-- the HISTORICAL CHURCH -- the APOSTOLICAL CHURCH -- the BIBLICAL CHURCH -- the UNIVERSAL CHURCH of JESUS CHRIST! -- it's the CATHOLIC CHURCH and no other!

Officially, that's CONFIRMED from the Iglesia ni Cristo:

PASUGO Abril 1966, p. 46: “Ang Iglesia Katolika na sa pasimula ay siyang Iglesia ni Cristo."