All Churchs Right?

[Montie_Claunch]

A Fundamentalist told me that scripture says that all churchs are right and that the diffrences are superficial saying that the bible says that those the that breack the least of the commandments and teaches others to do the same is the least of the kingdom of heaven and he says that this shows that they are still right and the true church. What should I say about this? Thanks and God bless.

 

[Aureole]

Where in the Bible does it say what he’s claiming? If he gives you passages to support his position then you can work to explain his misconceptions.

It doesn’t make sense that every church is the right and true church. Some Christians believe the Eucharist is really the Body and Blood of our Saviour; other Christians claim that He was not God; still other Christians believe the God of the Old Testament is evil while Jesus is good. This doesn’t even bring in members of other religions where beliefs range quite widely, some are even outright opposed to Christianity.

 

[Liberian]

Montie,

Does your Fundamentalist agree that the Episcopal Church is right in approving abortion and consecrating a practicing homosexual to be a bishop?

• Liberian

 

[gardenswithkids]

A Fundamentalist told me that scripture says that all churchs are right and that the diffrences are superficial …

If you dare discuss the book of Revelation with this person, you could point to Revelation chapters 2 and 3. An angel addresses the church at Ephesus, Smyrma, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, & Laodicea with words unique to each place. There certainly aren’t just superficial differences. Catholics probably regard those “churches” more in terms of parishes or area churches (for there was just one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic church when John wrote Revelation, and if I’m not mistaken St. John was bishop over those churches.) But for someone embracing “sola scriptura”, those words addressed to each church may cut through the notion that all churches are right with no significant differences.

I read Revelation when attending a protestant church that was experiencing some significant problems. The angel’s address to each church helped break me of the notion that all Christian churches are basically the same–especially the address to Laodicea, which Rev. 3:16 sometimes translates to tell “I will vomit you from my mouth.” I may not be able to understand all of the book of Revelation, but those chapters helped me see that not all churches are the same. (I didn’t want to attend one that was vommitted.)

 

[NotWorthy]

Ask them to explain Pauls letters to the Corinthians, Galatians, and others. These epistles were meant to correct errors in the respective churches.

 

[Mystophilus]

It doesn’t make sense that every church is the right and true church. Some Christians believe the Eucharist is really the Body and Blood of our Saviour; other Christians claim that He was not God; still other Christians believe the God of the Old Testament is evil while Jesus is good. This doesn’t even bring in members of other religions where beliefs range quite widely, some are even outright opposed to Christianity.

It can make sense.

What you are saying is, “They cannot all be true churches if they believe different things.” Thus, you are assuming that, in order for a church to be a true church, it must believe the right things, and they cannot all believe the right things if they all believe different things.

First, let us deal with the assumption that a church must believe in the right things in order to be the true church. How can we establish this? Is believing the right things really the requirement? Would God say to one person, “Well, you were not a good person, but you believed the right things, and so you are in”, and then, to another, “You were a good person, but you did not believe the right things, and so you are out”? Only an unjust God would do such a thing.

Even assuming it were true, think about the range of opinions between the members of any one church. Two Catholics might both believe in Papal Infallibility, while one believes in Limbo and another does not. Each human being has a slightly different belief set from the next one.

Thus, the true church, whichever one it is, must be composed of people who believe different things. If they have to believe what is true, then the true belief must be a shared core belief: I believe A+B+C, and you believe A+B+D, and we are both saved because we believe the necessary core beliefs A and B, while C and D are irrelevant.

Obviously, this same argument applies to different denominations within one religion, and to different religions.

At this point, we encounter a major epistemological problem: how can we, as mere mortals, actually know Almighty God’s basis for salvation?

Personally, I am quite fond of the Catholic response to this: the Catholic belief that other churches can be saved is an honest admission that they do not presume to know the mind of God. The Catholic church believes, in essence, that it is saved, but is too wise to pronounce upon the salvation of others.

 

[Aureole]

Glory to Jesus Christ.

Mystophilus, I agree wholeheartedly with you about the unjustness of a God who would do as you describe. Fortunately we have a just God and don’t have to worry about that. But I said nothing about man needing right belief in order to be saved. The “requirement” to salvation is, of course, Jesus Christ. I was pointing toward the various beliefs among Christians; the Eucharist, divinity of Jesus Christ, and the dual evil/good “God’s” of the Old and New Testaments. One Christian or another is mistaken in his belief, or lack thereof, about the Eucharist. Both can’t be right; either the belief that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is correct or it is not. The same applies to the divinity of Christ and the dual evil/good “God’s” idea. One belief is true, the other is not.

Your example about two Catholics believing different things is problematic because any two Catholics must believe in Papal Infallibility while belief in Limbo is clearly optional. Papal Infallibility was dogmatically declared during the First Vatican Council while Limbo has never been declared as such.

God, in His goodness, provided the Jews with certain beliefs that He willed them to keep. Basically God gave the Jews a Church. Our Saviour did the same thing in the Gospels. Both show us the “set of beliefs” the Church ought to have. Dissent from those beliefs no doubt puts us outside the Church founded by God, which I don’t think anyone would argue against. The path to salvation is a dangerous one but God gave us a Church to guide us along the path. Of course one can attempt it on his own but he would be endangering his own life needlessly, it is a dangerous path after all.

We, as mortals, can only know God’s basis for salvation because He revealed it to us. He has trodden the path Himself and taught another to be a guide for us. This is the one path to salvation, the one God walked, the one He gives us a guide to help us find our way. The only reason anyone finds the destination is because he walks parts of the same path the guide does, regardless of whether he has the guide with him or not.

I hope I’ve been helpful in some way. If anything is somewhat confusing feel free to ask about it. It may be helpful to read The Church and Salvation and Jesus Christ Established a Visible Church on Earth as well. The two authors there are much more eloquent than I (And provide references for further reading).

God bless you.

 

[NotWorthy]

Mysto,

The problem with you analogy is that you are equating the Church with her members. Members can believe this and not believe that to the risk of their soul. But Jesus promised that He would leave us a Church and that he would leave the Holy Spirit to guide her.

Therefore, the true church must teach the same thing, and it must be the truth. Do you think two “true churches” can teach the opposite about abortion?

 

[Contarini]

A Fundamentalist told me that scripture says that all churchs are right and that the diffrences are superficial saying that the bible says that those the that breack the least of the commandments and teaches others to do the same is the least of the kingdom of heaven and he says that this shows that they are still right and the true church. What should I say about this? Thanks and God bless.

That hardly sounds like a fundamentalist view. Are you sure you’re using this term correctly?

Does your friend agree that this means that the differences between Protestantism and Catholicism are superficial? Or is he just applying this to the differences among the Christian churches he happens to find congenial?

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Mysto,

The problem with you analogy is that you are equating the Church with her members.

Yes, because anything else amounts to an “invisible church” copout. I don’t care if it’s Catholics or Protestants doing it, it’s equally bogus.

The visible Church is an assembly of people gathered in Christ’s name. Whatever that assembly does is done by the Church. To say otherwise is to play irresponsible games.

Edwin

 

[rr1213]

A Fundamentalist told me that scripture says that all churchs are right and that the diffrences are superficial saying that the bible says that those the that breack the least of the commandments and teaches others to do the same is the least of the kingdom of heaven and he says that this shows that they are still right and the true church. What should I say about this? Thanks and God bless.

Doesn’t sound like a fundamentalist to me…they wouldn’t be equating all churches, especially those that do not practice sola scriptura.

 

[Mystophilus]

Mysto,

The problem with you analogy is that you are equating the Church with her members. Members can believe this and not believe that to the risk of their soul. But Jesus promised that He would leave us a Church and that he would leave the Holy Spirit to guide her.

Therefore, the true church must teach the same thing, and it must be the truth. Do you think two “true churches” can teach the opposite about abortion?

I am not sure what the Church is if not the εκκλησια, the assembly of members. What else constitutes a church than the group of believers?

What I suppose I really need to ask at this point is whether you are thinking of the Church as being the sum total of all the believers and all their various beliefs, i.e., the superset, or as a sort of ‘core’ of the variation, i.e., the intersection of their beliefs. From your second paragraph, it seems that the latter is the case, but I would like to be sure.

 

[Mystophilus]

We, as mortals, can only know God’s basis for salvation because He revealed it to us. He has trodden the path Himself and taught another to be a guide for us. This is the one path to salvation, the one God walked, the one He gives us a guide to help us find our way. The only reason anyone finds the destination is because he walks parts of the same path the guide does, regardless of whether he has the guide with him or not.

My original question has been diverted somewhat in response to the misnamed NotWorthy, but there is something here which I would like to tease out, if I may.

If there is only one path to salvation, what is it? Is it necessarily a complex, winding pattern of theological intricacies, or might it not be a regular but nonetheless difficult path of simplicity? Do we have to observe a great many rules, and perform a great many acts in the prescribed fashion in order to reach the end, or do we merely need to truly love the Lord our God and genuinely love our neighbours, which is both simpler and more difficult than observing any number of doctrinal rules?

If there is a simple path, might it not, then, be possible to follow it within any, or possible in no, church?

I hope I’ve been helpful in some way.

I must say that I am impressed by the elegance of your answer, and I would suggest that you should take that comment under the consideration that I spend all my days studying literature.

God bless you.

Through people like you, God does.

 

[NotWorthy]

I am not sure what the Church is if not the εκκλησια, the assembly of members. What else constitutes a church than the group of believers?

What I suppose I really need to ask at this point is whether you are thinking of the Church as being the sum total of all the believers and all their various beliefs, i.e., the superset, or as a sort of ‘core’ of the variation, i.e., the intersection of their beliefs. From your second paragraph, it seems that the latter is the case, but I would like to be sure.

My view of the Church (and I hope I’m on track with this) is that the Church is made up of two parts:

1. The institutional Church that is the hierarchial priesthood on up to the pope.
2. The Body of Believers

I have a feeling I lost track of this thread, and jumped in half-cocked. But my original intended point was that the Hierarchial Church must teach the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth (I’ve also found out it helps to teach WHY the truth is the truth). The body of Believers, even though we often don’t, should believe everything the Church teaches, or else we end up creating our own set of Catechisms. I was slightly confused by your question, so that’s why I gave you my answer in my own words.

Thanks!

P.S. Ummmmmmm… just wondering… if I am misnamed, what should my name be? And please be gentle in your answer! Remember, the censors are watching!

 

[Aureole]

Mystophilus you give me much credit where none is due. Thank you.

The only path to salvation, and indeed the simplicity of it is almost astounding, is brought to us by St. John the Baptist. I can’t do any better than he who said it “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matt. 3:2). This is what the Church’s mission is. I don’t think anyone will disagree that all need to repent. It’s a universal call. Now, that does not deal with complex, winding theological intricacies or observing a great many rules. It does show the great simplicity of the path, even though it’s still wrought with danger. We couldn’t have a guide unless it was a fairly simple path after all.

Truly loving God entails only two things as well; You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind and you shall love your neighbour as yourself. You’re familiar with this already but it always bears repeating. One shouldn’t ever grow tired of hearing this. If they do it’s a sign of something sinister at work.

We must now ask, what does truly loving God entail? It involves receiving His gifts freely and treasuring them. Many people look at the Ten Commandments strictly as laws when they’re really precious gifts. This is because they reveal the way to our Saviour. Observing the Ten Commandments helps us to “cut through the fog” so we can see “the way, and the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

So what does genuinely loving our neighbour entail? Well, again simplicity strikes us. Genuinely loving our neighbour can only mean one thing: bringing them to God. This isn’t speaking just of missionary work, everyone, everywhere, at every time must help bring God to their neighbour and them to God. This is a part of God’s infinite mercy, that He allows His creatures to participate in His plan of salvation. Bringing our neighbour God and them to God is genuine love since a lover only wants to bring the beloved “the way, and the truth, and the life.”.

But how are we to know the true path to salvation? Because God gave it to us. In Genesis God started the journey of salvation Himself and He reached the summit on Calvary. While reading the Bible we aren’t just reading historic characters, times, places, theology, etc. We’re reading God’s journey of salvation for us. He doesn’t need salvation, but we do. He treks it for us. He also gave us the means to find His path, not only in reason and will but also through His numerous gifts. God made a visible Church time-and-time again. In the beginning it was only Adam and Eve but throughout the years God multiplied His Church. God’s Church can be found by looking for God’s marks: one, holy, catholic, apostolic. The Church must be one since God is one. The Church must be holy since God is holy. The Church must be catholic because God is catholic. The Church is apostolic because God is apostolic (Where does the authority of the apostles come from unless it is given by God?).

Anyway, I must be off to bed. School comes early in the morning and I’m already up late. I pray I haven’t managed confusion. I also hope I managed to discuss your question adequately, if not then please inquire. Good night, God bless you.

All glory to God.

 

[Mystophilus]

My view of the Church (and I hope I’m on track with this) is that the Church is made up of two parts:

1. The institutional Church that is the hierarchial priesthood on up to the pope.
2. The Body of Believers

I have a feeling I lost track of this thread, and jumped in half-cocked. But my original intended point was that the Hierarchial Church must teach the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth (I’ve also found out it helps to teach WHY the truth is the truth). The body of Believers, even though we often don’t, should believe everything the Church teaches, or else we end up creating our own set of Catechisms. I was slightly confused by your question, so that’s why I gave you my answer in my own words.

Your own words are just fine. I would say that your explanation accorded with my second proferred option: when you say, “The Church teaches what is right”, you do not mean to say, “Every Catholic believes and professes what is right”, but, “The core of the Church, i.e., the Magesterium, teaches what is right.” This, I suppose, explains why the Catholic Church places such a high importance upon obedience: if the Magesterium unerringly teach the True Way, then a believer need only follow them.

P.S. Ummmmmmm… just wondering… if I am misnamed, what should my name be? And please be gentle in your answer! Remember, the censors are watching!

It is currently 100% wrong: remove the negative from the front.

 

[NotWorthy]

Your own words are just fine. I would say that your explanation accorded with my second proferred option: when you say, “The Church teaches what is right”, you do not mean to say, “Every Catholic believes and professes what is right”, but, “The core of the Church, i.e., the Magesterium, teaches what is right.” This, I suppose, explains why the Catholic Church places such a high importance upon obedience: if the Magesterium unerringly teach the True Way, then a believer need only follow them.

Yes, I think you summarized my words very accurately.

It is currently 100% wrong: remove the negative from the front.

I’m sorry. I went to Mass Sunday and when I saw Father raise the Host up, I realized once again that I am very appropriately named.

Thank you very much for the kind words anyway!!!