Articles on "Separated Brethren"

[pablope]

No,

My man-made interpretation? Touche’! I say that yours is the man-made interpretation, in Greek and Latin.

 

[SyroMalankara]

It is truly sad.

There is only one Gospel, and that is Christ Jesus. Your Jesus is my Jesus, and there is no difference between them.

Right, we disagree on who is being accurate regarding the one Gospel.

Your issue is that I do not agree that the church addressed in Matthew 16 is the Roman Catholic Church.

Forget about the RC Church. Is there one united church or thousands of divided groups with no union and differing beliefs? Which is Truth and good news?

It is Jesus’ church, and it is not bounded by walls and layers of a hierarchy which has proved itself to be in error on occasion.

That’s exactly what the Catholic Church teaches.

The Catholic church is a wonderful assembly in and of itself; but it is not the church that Jesus started.

Umm… that’s clearly just an opinion. We believe there is no subsistant difference between the two.

That one spans the borders of physical church property and its members are united in heart and mind under one leader - Jesus.

Sounds like the Catholic Church to me.

Your accusation about my Gospel being false is a false accusation in itself.

no it isn’t. You stated that the rock of faith doesn’t converge with the Rock/Peter. This lack of understanding is a falsity and does not share the true Good News in it’s fullness.

I have read here that people seem to admit that Protestants don’t hate the Catholics for what they believe but for what they* THINK *that Catholics believe. It seems the reverse is also true.

It’s very difficult to keep up with an every changing, always shifting concept - this is what ‘protestantism’ is. Maybe if you can break it down by individual group’s beliefs it would be easier to address.

Is it your rule that God cannot choose anyone unless that person is a member of the RCC?

Well, not quite. The RCC already is in communion with 23 Eastern Catholic Churches; recognizes 300+million Eastern Orthodox Churches as true Churches; recognizes 86+million Oriental Orthodox as true Churches; 600000+ Church of the East members; and a smattering of other Churches with Apostolic Succession. That’s by far the supermajority of Christianity worldwide, over 2billion out of just under 2.5B Christians worldwide.

I trust God to place His mighty hand on our efforts, and He does. However, those with the commission from Jesus to be out and testifying remain both absent and silent. However, God has not yet closed the door for me to do so.

My man-made interpretation? Touche’! I say that yours is the man-made interpretation, in Greek and Latin. There is a difference between the Peter = piece of a large rock and The Rock. It is Peter’s faith that is The Rock. Jesus is the chief cornerstone.

So you and the minority of protestants claim. But your claim is relatively new in Christianity, and not Apostolic. In Aramaic, when Jesus renames Simon, it means Christ is joining the faith and the person. You are dividing.

I am the one who goes by what Christ revealed, but I get accused of error because I am not going by what the RCC reveals. Is this the time that I can have it both ways?

Every protestant’s claim. They are right, everyone who disagrees is wrong. Does not matter to them that they are speaking for themselves and claiming God is telling only them. The entire rest of Christianity that disagrees with the one individual is the wrong one.

I am one of the least likely candidates to be a minister, and the people who knew me “way back when” would fall off their barstools if they saw me now.

I do what I do because God has laid the task upon me.

I think I am in a better position to know that God has chosen me that anyone here is able to say that God did not. The accusations of a false Gospel coming from my brethren is surely being heard and seen by God. Are you all good with that?

God says to test the self-proclaimed prophet. You are claiming to be inspired directly from God (an incredible claim) and not wanting to be questioned according to Scriptural and Ecclesial precedent. Doesn’t that come off as just a bit arrogant and ironic.

 

[Bballer32]

Hi B,

Tell it like it is, do not hold back. Better to be hot or cold. Even honest.

In love may I ask if you do not think some Protestants think the Catholic Church is the one teaching a different gospel than Christ’s ?

As we find in the book of Job, Elihu humbly states that the older, the aged should teach wisdom, but they failed Job. In the end it is God that puts understanding in the heart of man, even a younger man

Blessings

Ben,

I like debating with you. You like the black and whiteness of things and aren’t all uptight about this topic either.

Oh there are probably thousands of Protestants that believe the Catholic Church teaches a different Gospel. I won’t deny that claim. What’s sad is that a lot of Catholics will simply see their relationship with Protestants with the similarities and leave the differences at the door to avoid confrontation.

But as I see it, the only way to reunification is if we work to overcome our differences by panning out who’s right and who’s wrong. There cannot be a fullness of truth in one place and then a fullness of truth in another. If I believed as truth that anyone who likes dogs goes to hell and someone else believed as truth that anyone who likes dogs goes to heaven, then one of us is clearly wrong. That is why I seek to help those without the fullness of truth come to know the Truth.

As for God putting the truth in man’s heart, He places a desire for the Truth not the answer to the Truth. That’s a natural human thing since we are all sons of Truth. Christ brought the fullness of truth and taught all about the basic truths (i.e. divorce, covenants, salvation, etc.). However, Christ gave His authority of declaring truths and falsities to one Church (I will give you the keys…).

That’s what I’m trying to get at.

 

[Bballer32]

It is truly sad.

There is only one Gospel, and that is Christ Jesus. Your Jesus is my Jesus, and there is no difference between them.

Your issue is that I do not agree that the church addressed in Matthew 16 is the Roman Catholic Church. It is Jesus’ church, and it is not bounded by walls and layers of a hierarchy which has proved itself to be in error on occasion. The Catholic church is a wonderful assembly in and of itself; but it is not the church that Jesus started. That one spans the borders of physical church property and its members are united in heart and mind under one leader - Jesus.

Your accusation about my Gospel being false is a false accusation in itself.

I have read here that people seem to admit that Protestants don’t hate the Catholics for what they believe but for what they* THINK *that Catholics believe. It seems the reverse is also true.

There is enough arrogance on both sides to go around.

Here’s a quote from a Protestant Historian by the name of Wilhelm Pauck:

“the difference between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism is so profound that it seems almost impossible to recognize them as two forms of one Christianity.”

That should debunk the whole “Preaching-the-same-gospel” belief

 

[Erich]

I think I am in a better position to know that God has chosen me that anyone here is able to say that God did not.

So… where are the miracles, signs and wonders that must accompany your direct calling by God, as verification? Jesus Himself submitted to this proof-test, so I wouldn’t be too quick to exempt yourself from this same test, unless of course you wish to say you are greater than Jesus.

As this link demonstrates, scripturally, there is only one way to become a legitimate ambassador of Christ: by appointment from a superior. This can be done in two ways: being commissioned by a legitimate ambassador (apostolic succession), or being called directly by God. Ss. Timothy and Titus were appointed to their positions of authority by succession, Moses and St. Paul were appointed to their positions directly by God, with no human mediation.

Scripture also does not speak well of those who illegitimately take this position upon themselves. In the book of Acts, illegitimate leaders attempted to confuse the Christians by claiming that circumcision was necessary for salvation. The Council of Jerusalem commented upon this, saying: “…we have heard that some persons from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions…” (Acts 15:24). Note well what is presumed here: that it was wrong of these men to act in such a way without first having received their commission, their “instructions,” from those in legitimate authority.

 

[Bballer32]

So… where are the miracles, signs and wonders that must accompany your direct calling by God, as verification? Jesus Himself submitted to this proof-test, so I wouldn’t be too quick to exempt yourself from this same test, unless of course you wish to say you are greater than Jesus.

As this link demonstrates, scripturally, there is only one way to become a legitimate ambassador of Christ: by appointment from a superior. This can be done in two ways: being commissioned by a legitimate ambassador (apostolic succession), or being called directly by God. Ss. Timothy and Titus were appointed to their positions of authority by succession, Moses and St. Paul were appointed to their positions directly by God, with no human mediation.

Scripture also does not speak well of those who illegitimately take this position upon themselves. In the book of Acts, illegitimate leaders attempted to confuse the Christians by claiming that circumcision was necessary for salvation. The Council of Jerusalem commented upon this, saying: “…we have heard that some persons from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions…” (Acts 15:24). Note well what is presumed here: that it was wrong of these men to act in such a way without first having received their commission, their “instructions,” from those in legitimate authority.

 

[Tommy999]

…

I think it is somewhere in 2nd Pontifications 12 that says that those who have not been blessed by the RCC cannot know the truth.

2nd Pontifications? I’m having trouble locating that book in the New Testament. Does it come before or after Paul’s letters to the Filipinos?

 

[Tommy999]

So… where are the miracles, signs and wonders that must accompany your direct calling by God, as verification? Jesus Himself submitted to this proof-test, so I wouldn’t be too quick to exempt yourself from this same test, unless of course you wish to say you are greater than Jesus.

As this link demonstrates, scripturally, there is only one way to become a legitimate ambassador of Christ: by appointment from a superior. This can be done in two ways: being commissioned by a legitimate ambassador (apostolic succession), or being called directly by God. Ss. Timothy and Titus were appointed to their positions of authority by succession, Moses and St. Paul were appointed to their positions directly by God, with no human mediation.

Scripture also does not speak well of those who illegitimately take this position upon themselves. In the book of Acts, illegitimate leaders attempted to confuse the Christians by claiming that circumcision was necessary for salvation. The Council of Jerusalem commented upon this, saying: “…we have heard that some persons from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions…” (Acts 15:24). Note well what is presumed here: that it was wrong of these men to act in such a way without first having received their commission, their “instructions,” from those in legitimate authority.

In the paradigm you describe, where does someone like Billy Graham fit in? As some of you may know, he was not Catholic but won many converts to the Christian faith (including me, several years ago). Was he not used of God because the Catholic Church did not authorize his ministry?

 

[SyroMalankara]

In the paradigm you describe, where does someone like Billy Graham fit in? As some of you may know, he was not Catholic but won many converts to the Christian faith (including me, several years ago). Was he not used of God because the Catholic Church did not authorize his ministry?

Billy actively sought approval from Catholic leaders, and even met with Pope JP2 to get his blessing - that’s more than some Catholic leaders do.

 

[Peter_J]

Billy actively sought approval from Catholic leaders, and even met with Pope JP2 to get his blessing

And if I remember correctly, Catholics who attended his revivals and requested follow-up were referred to local Catholic churches. (I’m probably oversimplifying the details, but perhaps someone else can elaborate.)

 

[Abu]

Tommy999 #169
where does someone like Billy Graham fit in? As some of you may know, he was not Catholic but won many converts to the Christian faith (including me, several years ago). Was he not used of God because the Catholic Church did not authorize his ministry?

What is “the Christian faith”? It certainly cannot be the many thousands of sects all teaching something different – you have seen that remarriage after divorce, contraception, abortion, euthanasia, IVF, cloning, lack of the priesthood, all contribute to turning away from the truth and are conclusive evidence also of not having the fullness of Christ’s Truth which is available only in and through the Catholic Church which He founded, and declared that He would be with His Apostles and their legitimate successors until the end of the world.

So the real questions are precisely to whom did the Christ entrust His own Church and what did He mandate? We know that clearly from post #51 – to St Peter as His Chief Vicar and the Twelve.

Those like Billy Graham are as the Church Herself teaches in Vatican II, Lumen Gentium:
“15. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter.”

Christ did not institute thousands of differing sects but only one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church, with seven sacraments, including the Holy Eucharist, only available through His priesthood, and which teaches, sanctifies and rules, and gave the world the Sacred Scriptures.

 

[Tommy999]

Billy actively sought approval from Catholic leaders, and even met with Pope JP2 to get his blessing - that’s more than some Catholic leaders do.

I found this quote from Cardinal Cushing of Boston back in the prime of Billy Graham’s crusades on an anti-Catholic blog site that was ironically using it to accuse Billy Graham of having been too friendly with Catholics. For example:

"…Graham spent forty-five minutes with Richard Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston. Cushing stated that he was 100% for Billy. The Cleveland Plain Dealer for October 8, 1964 reported Cushing’s words:
I have never known a religious crusade that was more effective than Dr. Graham’s. I have never heard the slightest criticism of anything he has ever said from a Catholic source. Graham returned the favor by saying: “I feel much closer to Roman Catholic tradition than to some of the more liberal Protestants.”**

*According to Foundation for January-February, 1990, the organ of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, The Evangelist, for November 2, 1989, the following occurred:

About 20, 000 persons are busy making ready for Billy Graham’s 1990 Capitol District Crusade, including representatives from 18 Protestant denominations in the area and a delegation of top Catholic officials appointed by Bishop Howard J Hubbard.

The Graham Crusade, scheduled for April 22-29 at the Knickerbocker Arena in Albany, comes in response to a request made by Bishop Hubbard and other religious leaders, who three years ago, formally invited the world renowned evangelist to preach here. There are nine Catholics on the SO-person executive committee set up to direct the Crusade… Diocesan officials view the Graham Crusade. as 'a tool for evangelization,’ explained an executive committee member, Rev. James Kane, director of the diocesan ecumenical commission…*

As for the specific dogmatic content of Mr. Graham’s sermons, Father Kane said, “there is nothing that Catholics should feet uncomfortable with or be leery of.” He said the evangelists emphasis on the Gospel and on the importance of the individuals personal relationship with Christ is consistent with Catholic teaching.

However, he added, “we would, of course, emphasize the importance of the Eucharist and the Mass, the sacraments, and the importance of the structure and organization of the Church and its bishops and the pope”.

 

[Riser]

Agreed.

Prove to me where Jesus says his Church is invisible. No where in all of the bible does Christ or St. Paul declare that the Church is an invisible body of believers. That’s just been a protestant belief since the reformation. It’s a stem of indifferentism, pluralism, and leads to relativism.

Why? You haven’t shown me how it’s not false.

I do applaud you on this argument. Yes, to a certain extent, Catholics, for the most part, don’t know exactly what Protestants believe. And this is because they hardly know their own faith, so why learn about another one.

However, you guys are the ones that broke away from the Church of Christ for reasons that you thought were what Catholics taught and believed. That is why for us to really know what you believe isn’t nearly as important because we know that it is already flawed to some degree and that all of your beliefs were originally Catholic, but now tainted with a few heresies here and there and division.

I for one love learning what Protestants truly believe so that I can help address them to the proper understanding of Christ’s teachings.

Jesus’ church is not invisible. It is not contained in a building but in the hearts of all those who love and obey Him. They assemble together with a common bond - the one who have given them the Comforter to guide them in their lives and to help them fulfill their purpose. The purpose of those who serve Him is not to cause division - yet some do. However, even those who are not in your church are still in the church that Jesus started, and it is not invisible. Like it or not, we are all parts of the same body - gifted and given to serve as He wills.

From 1Co 12:

Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be uninformed. You know that when you were pagans you were led astray to mute idols, however you were led. Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.

To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills. For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.

For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?

But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose.

And there are many who truly do have the love in Christ in their lives and hearts. They preach the gospel message - which is not quite as complicated as some may believe - and work to build the Kingdom of God.

Eph 4:

And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.

The valuable words here are “truth” and “love.” Nowhere did Jesus say His church would be labeled as one denomination, nor did He say it would be many. Jesus did tell us how people will know who are His - and it had nothing to do with a membership roster after having graduated from catechism. That was never a requirement to be saved or to serve as He directs.

Those are man-made traditions which Jesus did not teach. We are baptized into ONE BODY - not one organization. There are as many true Christians in the Protestant churches as there are in the Catholic ones, yet people on both sides make false accusations against the other. How can the church stand against the prince of this world when we won’t work together?

 

[Riser]

I don’t understand why you think that Jesus was referring to the rock of Peter’s faith, rather than Peter himself being the rock upon which His church would be built. In the Old Testament, whenever God changed someone’s name, it meant something very important. Jesus changed Simon’s name from Simon BarJona, to Simon Peter. Simon Peter means Peter the Rock. And Jesus said that it is upon this rock that He would build His church. There isn’t anything to indicate that Jesus was speaking here of faith only, that I can tell.

Context - and the fact that other passages say that Jesus is the cornerstone of His church, not Peter.

But the other issue is, there were turbulent years and dissent ion aplenty . There is no way that we can know that the RCC today is the same church that evolved a few hundred years later - even if they had the same name. We all must ask God to show us where we need to be. For some, it will be the Catholic church, but for others, maybe not.

We work where God will us to be. When we trash each other, we help Satan in his quest to hinder the church where Jesus is the cornerstone.

 

[Riser]

2nd Pontifications? I’m having trouble locating that book in the New Testament. Does it come before or after Paul’s letters to the Filipinos?

I know that it must exist since I keep hearing people quote from it.

 

[Riser]

And if I remember correctly, Catholics who attended his revivals and requested follow-up were referred to local Catholic churches. (I’m probably oversimplifying the details, but perhaps someone else can elaborate.)

Yes, because he recognized that God will lead people to where they need to be. Faith and discipleship do not exist in only one denomination.

Just as I have no problem with those who come to Jesus in our efforts choosing to attend a Catholic church. In some ways, depending on the person, they can be better off. It can suit them better. For others, it may not be so.

 

[Denise1957]

Context - and the fact that other passages say that Jesus is the cornerstone of His church, not Peter.

But the other issue is, there were turbulent years and dissent ion aplenty . There is no way that we can know that the RCC today is the same church that evolved a few hundred years later - even if they had the same name. We all must ask God to show us where we need to be. For some, it will be the Catholic church, but for others, maybe not.

We work where God will us to be. When we trash each other, we help Satan in his quest to hinder the church where Jesus is the cornerstone.

No one here is trashing anyone. It is uncharitable to say this.

How is it that Peter cannot be the rock upon which Christ builds his church if Jesus is the cornerstone? Well, Jesus was to return to heaven, right? How then is there to be a visible church? There has to be a visible church, and it has to have a leader. A visible leader. Here’s a Catholic Answers article which explains it:

catholic.com/tracts/peter-and-the-papacy

Scroll about two-thirds of the way down to see the bit about what we’re discussing above, under the heading of “Another Alternative”:

“The previous argument also settles the question of whether the word refers to Christ himself, since he is mentioned within the profession of faith. The fact that he is elsewhere, by a different metaphor, called the cornerstone (Eph. 2:29, 1 Peter 2:4-8) does not disprove that here Peter is the foundation. Christ is naturally the principle and, since he will be returning to heaven, the invisible foundation of the Church that he will establish; but Peter is named by him as the secondary and, because he and his successors will remain on earth, the visible foundation, Peter can be a foundation only because Christ is the cornerstone.”

 

[Denise1957]

We all must ask God to show us where we need to be. For some, it will be the Catholic church, but for others, maybe not.

Everyone is called upon to join the Church that was established by Christ our Lord. One cannot have the fullness of the faith unless they do so.

 

[benhur]

As for God putting the truth in man’s heart, He places a desire for the Truth not the answer to the Truth

Yes, the Father draws us to Christ and Christ to the Father. “No man seeks after God.” Yet He says “seek and ye shall find”. He, as you say, places the desire, even will for the Father in us, where it once was not.

But he does also place the “answer”, wisdom, understanding in a man. That is what Elihu said.

“We know all things for, little children, you have an unction from the Holy Ghost.” (John’s epistle paraphrased). Yet we see things “darkly as thru a glass” relative to when we see Him face to face.(Paul) .

The same divine revelation from the Father that happened to Peter about “whom is Christ” happens to us all, not just clergy.

Augustine, while loving the role of the church and the preacher, still said “He (Christ) teaches us”.

Why else would the Lord give us spiritual ears for His voice also?

 

[benhur]

Everyone is called upon to join the Church that was established by Christ our Lord. One cannot have the fullness of the faith unless they do so.

God bless you Denise for I chuckle a bit, with a smile, at how you are a die hard for your Catholic Church. We should expect no less.

Blessings