All non-Catholics agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity/purity.

[joe370]

All non-Catholics agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity.

A) The Bishop of Rome as chief shepherd, still heads a single Catholic Church in communion with Rome, and has maintained doctrinal integrity/purity for almost 2000 years.

B) Non-Catholics, on the other hand, adhering to the practice of scripture alone as the Christians final authority, for the past 500 years, almost, has proven to be a failed experiment in producing a single Protestant faith among those groups who adhere to the practice of sola scriptura, which has compromised doctrinal integrity/purity, over the span of those centuries. Some of them, as I have learned here at CAF, even disagree as to what constitutes the practice of sola scriptura. leading to even more doctrinal confusion.

If in fact Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity/purity which will better assist the evangelist in the spreading of the Gospel, then which method has been more effective:

A or B?

 

[ESMDHokie77]

A!

Jesus didn’t write a testament, he created the Church!

 

[Rightlydivide]

If you do not agree with the doctrines of the Bishop of Rome, what good does it do?
What measures did the Bishop of Rome support to suppress those who hold contrary doctrines? Force can be effective.

 

[JonNC]

All non-Catholics agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity.

A) The Bishop of Rome as chief shepherd, still heads a single Catholic Church in communion with Rome, and has maintained doctrinal integrity/purity for almost 2000 years.

B) Non-Catholics, on the other hand, adhering to the practice of scripture alone as the Christians final authority, for the past 500 years, almost, has proven to be a failed experiment in producing a single Protestant faith among those groups who adhere to the practice of sola scriptura, which has compromised doctrinal integrity/purity, over the span of those centuries. Some of them, as I have learned here at CAF, even disagree as to what constitutes the practice of sola scriptura. leading to even more doctrinal confusion.

If in fact Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity/purity which will better assist the evangelist in the spreading of the Gospel, then which method has been more effective:

A or B?

Hi Joe,
Whether one agrees with A or B (and remembering that B could be considered an outgrowth of A), the question still remains how do we get to the point where either takes place in returning us to unity?

Pope Benedict XVI makes clear his belief that men cannot bring unity, but only the Holy Spirit. *“We must entrust ourselves to the Lord, because he is the only one that can give us unity. Let us hope that he will bring us to this unity that we now await.” *

Jon

 

[GeorgeTheWild]

Don’t forget option C:

C) The Holy Sees were schismatic in their quest for power, and true doctrine integrity lies with the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Orthodox Church.

 

[joe370]

Don’t forget option C:

C) The Holy Sees were schismatic in their quest for power, and true doctrine integrity lies with the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Orthodox Church.

Good point. We must not rule out the EOC.

 

[wisdomseeker]

All non-Catholics agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity.

A) The Bishop of Rome as chief shepherd, still heads a single Catholic Church in communion with Rome, and has maintained doctrinal integrity/purity for almost 2000 years.

B) Non-Catholics, on the other hand, adhering to the practice of scripture alone as the Christians final authority, for the past 500 years, almost, has proven to be a failed experiment in producing a single Protestant faith among those groups who adhere to the practice of sola scriptura, which has compromised doctrinal integrity/purity, over the span of those centuries. Some of them, as I have learned here at CAF, even disagree as to what constitutes the practice of sola scriptura. leading to even more doctrinal confusion.

If in fact Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity/purity which will better assist the evangelist in the spreading of the Gospel, then which method has been more effective:

A or B?

the only way to unity is for everyone to come to the CC where Jesus is. Remember that disobedience got where those outside the Church is today.

 

[ForeverGrace]

Question? Who exactly says that “All non-Catholics agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity/purity”? I’m not a Catholic and I’ve never said that, nor do I believe it. Is there a source or a link that I can read? I don’t want to misunderstand the intention of the statement.

Thanks very much.

 

[joe370]

Question? Who exactly says that “All non-Catholics agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity/purity”? I’m not a Catholic and I’ve never said that, nor do I believe it. Is there a source or a link that I can read? I don’t want to misunderstand the intention of the statement.

Thanks very much.

I just assumed all Christians believed that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity. If you don not agree that Christian unity is essential to doctrinal integrity then perhaps this thread is not for you.

Thanks for the feedback though…

 

[Erich]

What measures did the Bishop of Rome support to suppress those who hold contrary doctrines?

For the first several centuries, probably few (if any). When the “score” was “Lions 1, Christians 0” it wasn’t those who hold contrary doctrines who were being suppressed.

 

[mark_a]

B) Non-Catholics, on the other hand, adhering to the practice of scripture alone as the Christians final authority, for the past 500 years

I don’t think SS is the root of the problem. The root of the problem is the idea that the Holy Spirit will lead every reader of scripture into the proper understanding of the scripture in question (the sin of pride), with no non-negotiable understanding(s).

One needs only to look at the abortion question to see how it plays out.