Assenting to Authority (Protestant vs. Catholic)

[LHJOHNSON]

Very provocative. There is a God. God gave the Bible. The Bible describes Jesus and the founding of the Church. We study the Bible and the teachings of the Church from the beginning. The Church is the authority that interprets the Bible and Traditon. I would submit that there is evidence to support each step that would lead a "reasonable"person to believe. What part can we know by reason and what part do we know by faith and if the above progression is not true what is the alternative? This sounds like it has to do,at least in part, with Faith and Reason. Peace be with you,LHJ

Link to Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason) John Paul II

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_15101998_fides-et-ratio_en.html

 

[Eufrosnia]

Very provocative. There is a God. God gave the Bible. The Bible describes Jesus and the founding of the Church. We study the Bible and the teachings of the Church from the beginning. The Church is the authority that interprets the Bible and Traditon. I would submit that there is evidence to support each step that would lead a "reasonable"person to believe. What part can we know by reason and what part do we know by faith and if the above progression is not true what is the alternative? This sounds like it has to do,at least in part, with Faith and Reason. Peace be with you,LHJ

Link to Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason) John Paul II

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_15101998_fides-et-ratio_en.html

Yes. But one caveat is that we have to first know that the Bible is indeed from God. As you know, there are lots of religions and even somewhat Christian groups like Mormons who claim other books as being from God.

Since we cannot verify through our senses as to which book is from God or not, unless we were directly contacted and told by God, we cannot start with that.

So technically speaking, Catholics start at Authority of Christ → Authority of Church → Scripture & Tradition.

 

[Tomster]

Very provocative. There is a God. God gave the Bible. The Bible describes Jesus and the founding of the Church. We study the Bible and the teachings of the Church from the beginning. The Church is the authority that interprets the Bible and Traditon. I would submit that there is evidence to support each step that would lead a "reasonable"person to believe. What part can we know by reason and what part do we know by faith and if the above progression is not true what is the alternative? This sounds like it has to do,at least in part, with Faith and Reason. Peace be with you,LHJ

Link to Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason) John Paul II

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_15101998_fides-et-ratio_en.html

Faith AND Reason!

 

[Tomster]

Yes. But one caveat is that we have to first know that the Bible is indeed from God. As you know, there are lots of religions and even somewhat Christian groups like Mormons who claim other books as being from God.

Since we cannot verify through our senses as to which book is from God or not, unless we were directly contacted and told by God, we cannot start with that.

So technically speaking, Catholics start at Authority of Christ → Authority of Church → Scripture & Tradition.

Badda-bing, badda-boom!

 

[aidanbradypop]

Bingo!

Really? Really?

This what it boils down to. The Catholic Church has authority because it says it does. In order to accept this you have used your personal interpretation to assess the evidence you rely on.

Wow. hmmmmmmm :banghead:

Ok now that I got that out of the way.

So when the Catholic Church “claims” authority we are wrong, but when a Protestant denomination does the same, they are correct? So by what authority gives you the right to claim such a thing? What authority do you have to make false statements about the Church?

You see, in Scripture (The Catholic Scriptures that you read from) Christ gave the Church authority. So I trust that when Christ says something, I should believe it.

When you use your personal interpretation or that of your pastor, are you also in error as you claim the Church is for doing so?

Blessings
Dustin

 

[Tomster]

Well, I don’t know if what I am about to relate has any bearing on this thread. But, since the title of this thread is “Assenting to Authority (Protestant vs. Catholic)” I’ll go ahead and relate it.

Almost seventy years ago, around 1955 or so, there occurred what was called the Wisconsin heresy trials. These heresy trials cut across several different Lutheran denominations and caused a major problem within American Lutheranism. Three Lutheran pastors were tried by their Northwest Synod on charges of denying the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection of Christ, and the value of intercessory prayer. Two pastors were found guilty, one was acquitted but resigned his pastorate. The synod then suspended one of the guilty pastors from ministry, but the other guilty pastor was defended by his congregation, which stood by him, with the result that the congregation withdrew form the Northwest Synod.

All the while, liberal minded Lutherans felt that an injury had been done not only to the three pastors but to the reputation of American Lutheranism. They tried to have the cases re-examined by the supposedly higher authority of the United Lutheran Church to which the Northwest Synod belonged, but without success. The reason, believe it or not, was a fear of schism. Any attempted exercise of jurisdiction over the Northwest Synod would have been against the constitution of the U.L.C. which was ostensibly a Church, and yet so loosely federated that “it had no authority in constituent synods or their congregations or seminaries, and no official way to enter an affair like this one.”

Talk about authority or lack thereof.

 

[Tomster]

Really? Really?

Wow. hmmmmmmm :banghead:

Ok now that I got that out of the way.

So when the Catholic Church “claims” authority we are wrong, but when a Protestant denomination does the same, they are correct? So by what authority gives you the right to claim such a thing? What authority do you have to make false statements about the Church?

You see, in Scripture (The Catholic Scriptures that you read from) Christ gave the Church authority. So I trust that when Christ says something, I should believe it.

When you use your personal interpretation or that of your pastor, are you also in error as you claim the Church is for doing so?

Blessings
Dustin

I don’t think they are willing or, more directly, can answer these questions given the continuing splits and disintegration of the various Protestant churches and sects. Absolutely no unity among them whatsoever. None.

 

[SyCarl]

Sy,

In regards to the last paragraph, Catholics do not use their own personal interpretation to assess the evidence. The Catholic Church has legitimate authority because Christ said so and Catholics believe what Jesus said. It’s based on our faith in Him and what He said.

Now is that not your personal interpretation of what Jesus said?

 

[Tomster]

Really? Really?

Wow. hmmmmmmm :banghead:

Ok now that I got that out of the way.

So when the Catholic Church “claims” authority we are wrong, but when a Protestant denomination does the same, they are correct? So by what authority gives you the right to claim such a thing? What authority do you have to make false statements about the Church?

You see, in Scripture (The Catholic Scriptures that you read from) Christ gave the Church authority. So I trust that when Christ says something, I should believe it.

When you use your personal interpretation or that of your pastor, are you also in error as you claim the Church is for doing so?

Blessings
Dustin

What our Protestant brothers fail to realize or realize but don’t want to admit is that the Church actively existed before there was any doctrinal teaching as to its precise nature. Christ promised the foundation of the Church and defined its apostolic structure (Matthew 18:18) under Peter’s primacy (Matthew 16:19). On Peter he confered the office of chief shepherd (John 21: 15-17) and entrusted His mission and the fullness of His power to the Apostles (Matthew 28: 18-20) and (John 20:23), whose activity in the early Church (under Peter’s guidance) was authoritative, as is shown in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 15;28).

You have to wonder what bible these guys have been reading and how their pastors have been interpreting it for them. This is 101 stuff.

 

[Tomster]

Now is that not your personal interpretation of what Jesus said?

No.

 

[Tomster]

Now is that not your personal interpretation of what Jesus said?

See post # 29

 

[aidanbradypop]

What our Protestant brothers fail to realize or realize but don’t want to admit is that the Church actively existed before there was any doctrinal teaching as to its precise nature. Christ promised the foundation of the Church and defined its apostolic structure (Matthew 18:18) under Peter’s primacy (Matthew 16:19). On Peter he confered the office of chief shepherd (John 21: 15-17) and entrusted His mission and the fullness of His power to the Apostles (Matthew 28: 18-20) and (John 20:23), whose activity in the early Church (under Peter’s guidance) was authoritative, as is shown in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 15;28).

You have to wonder what bible these guys have been reading and how their pastors have been interpreting it for them. This is 101 stuff.

On would think 101 stuff, but often is the case that many do not know about early Church history and those that do often tend to excuse certain things away. I remember one guy telling me that the ECFs had no authority and were often wrong. I asked where he heard that from and he stated that his Baptist pastor told him. See the irony in that?

 

[Tomster]

Well, I don’t know if what I am about to relate has any bearing on this thread. But, since the title of this thread is “Assenting to Authority (Protestant vs. Catholic)” I’ll go ahead and relate it.

Almost seventy years ago, around 1955 or so, there occurred what was called the Wisconsin heresy trials. These heresy trials cut across several different Lutheran denominations and caused a major problem within American Lutheranism. Three Lutheran pastors were tried by their Northwest Synod on charges of denying the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection of Christ, and the value of intercessory prayer. Two pastors were found guilty, one was acquitted but resigned his pastorate. The synod then suspended one of the guilty pastors from ministry, but the other guilty pastor was defended by his congregation, which stood by him, with the result that the congregation withdrew form the Northwest Synod.

All the while, liberal minded Lutherans felt that an injury had been done not only to the three pastors but to the reputation of American Lutheranism. They tried to have the cases re-examined by the supposedly higher authority of the United Lutheran Church to which the Northwest Synod belonged, but without success. The reason, believe it or not, was a fear of schism. Any attempted exercise of jurisdiction over the Northwest Synod would have been against the constitution of the U.L.C. which was ostensibly a Church, and yet so loosely federated that “it had no authority in constituent synods or their congregations or seminaries, and no official way to enter an affair like this one.”

Sy,

Want to take a glance at the above? How would you explain this historical event. This is one, just one, micro-cosmic look in the five hundred year history of Protestant in-fighting and break ups. Don’t want to look at the Lutherans, fine. Look at the Presbyterians then. Don’t even talk about authority, Sy. World-wide Protestantism has had authority issues from day one starting with Luther vs. Calvin.

We’ve been through this before haven’t we?

 

[Tomster]

On would think 101 stuff, but often is the case that many do not know about early Church history and those that do often tend to excuse certain things away. I remember one guy telling me that the ECFs had no authority and were often wrong. I asked where he heard that from and he stated that his Baptist pastor told him. See the irony in that?

Sure do. In Protestantism everybody is the pope but the Pope himself.

 

[brb3]

The problem for some Protestants with Catholic Authority is that it too closely resembles the OT Temple Levitical structure … that Jesus ‘split-the-curtain’ on, and, allowed the 70 AD conquest of Romans to utterly bring judgment upon.

High Priest = Pope, with too much authority, only Peter had this blessing from Christ.]
Temple Priest needed for animal sacrifices … no longer needed, so why Catholic Priesthood of OT structure ?

Rather, — lets allow every man be a new creation kingmaker, an equal, w/o the redeemed being ‘respecters of persons’ … able to read scripture, “for all its worth”, with benefit of promised H.S as their guide. A true NT paradigm, ‘me and Jesus’, the Church whatever we agree upon … since where ever 2 or 3 or gathered, Christ is there.

Authority of man ? We don’t need no stinking authority !! Only Jesus & HS as our guide !!

 

[LHJOHNSON]

Help me out here. I am trying to work through the original post. I am not sure about the statements of supernatural and authority and knowing by are senses. Is reason supernatural? In other words can we know something by reason that is supernatural? How about can we know God by reason? I would suggest that we can know there is a God by reason. We can know the Bible is the word of God by reason. That Jesus began the Church we can know by reason. We have witness of the Saints and Martyrs. We have the witness of the Church itself down through the centuries. There is nothing supernatural about knowing about God the Bible as the word of God and the Catholic Church. Where faith comes in is as a supernatural grace which enables us to believe. I think everyone has an authority in matters of interpretation unless they interpret the Bible on their own without even reading a commentary. I do not believe there is anything supernatural until we get to faith. The rest is disagreement on the evidence. Even our Faith is reasonable. While Faith is above reason it can never contradict reason. Peace be with you,LHJ

Catechism
159***** Faith and science: “Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.”37 “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.”38 (283, 2293)

 

[aidanbradypop]

Help me out here. I am trying to work through the original post. I am not sure about the statements of supernatural and authority and knowing by are senses. Is reason supernatural? In other words can we know something by reason that is supernatural? How about can we know God by reason? I would suggest that we can know there is a God by reason. We can know the Bible is the word of God by reason. That Jesus began the Church we can know by reason. We have witness of the Saints and Martyrs. We have the witness of the Church itself down through the centuries. There is nothing supernatural about knowing about God the Bible as the word of God and the Catholic Church. Where faith comes in is as a supernatural grace which enables us to believe. I think everyone has an authority in matters of interpretation unless they interpret the Bible on their own without even reading a commentary. I do not believe there is anything supernatural until we get to faith. The rest is disagreement on the evidence. Even our Faith is reasonable. While Faith is above reason it can never contradict reason. Peace be with you,LHJ

Catechism
159***** Faith and science: “Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.”37 “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.”38 (283, 2293)

I love that section in the Catechism.

 

[brb3]

“8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!” (Gal. 1:8-9, NASB)

A key scripture. The Gospel is the paramount teaching. It can’t evolve over time.

So, find that Church today who has stayed faithful to Gal. 1:8-9 , thru-out all history, and you have the ONE Church Christ ordained, founded on Peter, with Apostles as his Bishops… that will never fail, [per Words / Edict of Christ].

 

[aidanbradypop]

A key scripture. The Gospel is the paramount teaching. It can’t evolve over time.

So, find that Church today who has stayed faithful to Gal. 1:8-9 , thru-out all history, and you have the ONE Church Christ ordained, founded on Peter, with Apostles as his Bishops… that will never fail, [per Words / Edict of Christ].

Wonderful post but here is where you will run into a problem. Many Protestant believe that there is no “Church” but rather the church is the body of Christians or believers. Many believe Christ did not give authority to Pope Peter because there was no “church” to give authority over.

 

[Goya]

The problem for some Protestants with Catholic Authority is that it too closely resembles the OT Temple Levitical structure … that Jesus ‘split-the-curtain’ on, and, allowed the 70 AD conquest of Romans to utterly bring judgment upon.

…

Authority of man ? We don’t need no stinking authority !! Only Jesus & HS as our guide !!

Bingo!

Now is that not your personal interpretation of what Jesus said?

Ok, so now that y’all have chimed in…perhaps y’all (and anyone else of Protestant persuasion) can tell us what became of the Church that Christ founded? Rather, stated differently:

**When or how–that is, by what event or person–claiming or otherwise amounting to ‘Divine Revelation’–was the Church that was born on the Pentacost, and to which the Bible was entrusted–supposedly DIVESTED of the authority with which she was invested, at the Pentacost?

Seems to me rather logical–nay, Biblical–that if God invested something or someone with authority, it would take nothing shy of Divine Revelation (or direct Divine intervention) to divest it/him/her of such authority. No?

When did this supposedly happen to the ONE Church, going into the Reformation?

What became of that One Church?**