Those of you who’ve been around a while must think John Martignoni and I are best buds or something. I post about his apologetics work a good bit. Well, I can’t help myself. In his e-newsletter each week, he posts real-life email conversation he has with people who disagree with the Catholic Church…and by way of his conversation he does a great deal of teaching to those of us reading, about how to give an answer to our faith. In today’s newsletter, he’s conversing with a Canadian minister, and touches on the subject of essential vs. non-essential doctrines. The minister appears to agree with John that the concept shouldn’t exist because in general, it’s not okay to be wrong and know we’re wrong, because it’s rather self-serving to say, “well, I have the essentials right but I disagree on the nonessentials.” The minister then goes on to explain what he perceives to be the existence of essential vs. nonessential doctrines within the Catholic Church. John clears up the confusion very cleanly. The minister’s side is in italic, John’s response in in boldface.

It seems to me that the Roman Catholic church has drawn some lines. The RC church does not seem to have doctrinal conformity from every country, parish, and Christian. All I have to do is call a RC friend and have a conversation about to birth control to verify this fact. But the RC church still accepts that “believer in error” as “one of theirs.” So, in a way, the RC church practices the concept I am talking about. It is not ok (according to the RC church) for these people to disagree about birth control. But it does not seem to be essential for fellowship and they are not excommunicated. I do not feel that the same understanding is extended to other sincere followers of Christ.

Here you seem to not fully understand Catholic teaching and practice. You are correct – the Roman Catholic Church does not have doctrinal conformity from every country, parish, or Christian – which is to the possible spiritual demise of those who are not in conformity with the teachings of the Church. However, the Church does have doctrinal conformity in its teachings. This cannot be said for the Christian faith traditions that teach essentials vs. non-essentials (by the way, who gets to decide what is an essential and what is a non-essential?). And, for those who are not in conformity with Church teachings…those who believe and practice, for example, contraception…this is a very grave matter, and fellowship indeed has been broken. The Church does not need to break fellowship with them, because they have broken fellowship with the Church.

Whether it be contraception or some other area of non-conformity to Church teaching, these folks have broken fellowship with the Church, with the Body of Christ. Again, this is a very serious and grave matter. They should not receive Communion (the Lord’s Supper) if such is the case. They should not receive Communion, because they are not in communion with the Church. They are, in essence, out of fellowship with the Church until they repent and confess their sins and receive absolution. They may be “sincere followers of Christ,” but they are sincerely wrong in what they are doing. And, the Church extends the exact same understanding to non-Catholics who err in their beliefs…it tells them they are wrong and asks them to come to the knowledge of the truth…the truth that will set them free.

You can read John’s newsletters here, or better yet, subscribe.