Authority in Catholicism and Protestantism..

[CopticChristian]

Mackbrislawn,

Quite so, this is our dilemma. It’s why I am participating here, mostly to show the argument that Protestants need the certaintity of an infallible guide doesn’t hold water, as it works both ways and virtually ends discussion.

Because the word of God clearly carries authority, because it testifies that Jesus Christ established a church here on earth.

Regards

Lincs.

Lincs,

This is what you ask me and every other Catholic. Fortunately I have been through an evangelization by Protestants.

Taking me through the Bible, that isn’t the Bible of antiquity, a Protestant invention absent all the books…I am to believe that the Bible declares itself to be Scripture…based on 2Timothy and other proof texts that after analysis…I have to laugh

Then I am told that the Catholic Church has lied to me and the letter to Romans is introduced…and after seeing a lack of understanding of the letter to the Romans…it was written to Christians…hope you know that, I am to believe that Roman’s 10:9 was evident to Protestants as a means of salvation…and of course ignorance of the proper reading of Romans could cause someone to believe that…but then again I have to laugh…

Then I am to consider leaving Order for Disorder. So I am to believe that all the arguments for God…order, cause, etc do not apply to His Church…I am to believe that I am to take a book and find a church that is disordered and the journey never ends because ultimately I am the ultimate authority…

Then I discover that the guy with the most knowledge of the Bible has the most authority…there is a pecking order in Protestant circles…and even then that guy can be the wiz and the next day a heretic…a sea of confusion…

Then I have to become anti-Catholic and anti-everything…and choose between Cavlinism and Arminianism. Them I have to figure out Postmillenial or Premillinial…

Then I have to justify that the Bible came from the Church I left…and why am I leaving…

I kind of like the comfort of the order of home…

Your beliefs, your logic cause me mental conflict, I like order…I don’t like the idea of throwing everything I know up in the air and seeing how it lands…like a ton of bricks…I kind of like the building…

So here we have the answer to the OP…there is no Authority in Protestanism other than what I think and believe because if you disagree with me then who cares…I can read too…I have the Holy Spirit too…so each home becomes a church/papacy and magesterium unto itself…led by me…if you agree we are brothers…if we disagree well then I believe as I choose and you believe as you choose…

I just could not do that…

 

[GaryTaylor]

Well it exists across denominational boundaries as the invisible church. Visibly, local congregations and movements do this, based upon the consistent teaching of sacred scripture. On your comment on books removed from the bible, there was no set canon in the CC prior to trent, hence the multiple views on it before the council. The reformation chose one view, Rome another…

Yes the church is here on the earth.

Lincs.

Oh its invisable, a bit too invisable IMHO.

Linc the reformation “splintered” into many many views. You need a scorecard to keep track. What “consistent teaching of sacred scipture”? You mean the one called Sola Scriptura? Shining success that was. Even the mainline protestants are scared of what that created.

Rome still Rome.

 

[CopticChristian]

Indeed they were, I have a couple of bibles with them all in… I don’t hold them as inspired scripture, I do see things in them as edifying however.

This stance was nothing new of course, it’s well known that Jerome held them to be edifying but not of the same rank as the inspired scriptures. Cardinal Catejan likewise held the same view, and the council of Laodecia held to views differing with Trent.

I don’t know right now when they were gradually phased out of Protestant translations. Something to look at. But if you mean that because they were included all Protestants took them as inspired and equal to the other works, that’s not so…

Lincs.

Lincs,

Read through these threads. I don’t think it is fair to just grab them and insert them here…

The first thread refutes the Protocanonicals…in other words how do you know you have a Bible?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=609262

The second thread was not started by me but it will give you insight into my understanding of the letter to the Romans…after you read it…get back to me and see if we can’t come to terms with your understanding of the letter…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=615741

So if it is just you and I discussing the Bible and what the Bible says…you will have to first convince me that the Protocanonicals are the word of God…based on the Bible alone…an impossible task

Sadly too many Protestants that evangelized me taught me where they do not understand what they want me to accept…I learned this from the inside out…not the outside in…I was taught by Protestants…
Thanks

 

[Lincoln7]

Oh its invisable, a bit too invisable IMHO.

Linc the reformation “splintered” into many many views. You need a scorecard to keep track. What “consistent teaching of sacred scipture”? You mean the one called Sola Scriptura? Shining success that was. Even the mainline protestants are scared of what that created.

Rome still Rome.

Church Visible and Invisible: Calvin here: rbvincent.com/BibleStudies/churchvisible.htm
Or it’s the institutes Book IV, Chapter 1 if you wish to go to ccel. (remember you saying something about avoiding links on here Gary)

The consistent teaching of justification by Grace alone, through faith alone.

Lincs.

 

[Lincoln7]

Lincs,

Read through these threads. I don’t think it is fair to just grab them and insert them here…

The first thread refutes the Protocanonicals…in other words how do you know you have a Bible?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=609262

The second thread was not started by me but it will give you insight into my understanding of the letter to the Romans…after you read it…get back to me and see if we can’t come to terms with your understanding of the letter…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=615741

So if it is just you and I discussing the Bible and what the Bible says…you will have to first convince me that the Protocanonicals are the word of God…based on the Bible alone…an impossible task

Sadly too many Protestants that evangelized me taught me where they do not understand what they want me to accept…I learned this from the inside out…not the outside in…I was taught by Protestants…
Thanks

I shall read them and get back to you.

If I can’t prove to you that scripture is inspired, by the same logic ofc remember, you can’t prove to me Rome is the true church.

If we can’t discuss what scripture states I’m unsure how any dialogue will take place on this forum, considering you just asked me to discuss Romans with you, which I’m happy to do, nout more exciting than discussing scripture

Lincs.

 

[CopticChristian]

Church Visible and Invisible: Calvin here: rbvincent.com/BibleStudies/churchvisible.htm
Or it’s the institutes Book IV, Chapter 1 if you wish to go to ccel. (remember you saying something about avoiding links on here Gary)

The consistent teaching of justification by Grace alone, through faith alone.

Lincs.

So the authority is Calvin, a Catholic lawyer, whose father was excommunicated from the OHCAC for embezzelment and Calvin a murderer…OK…

Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ’s institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists

But that we may clearly grasp the sum of this matter, we must proceed by the following steps: the church universal is a multitude gathered from all nations; it is divided and dispersed in separate places, but agrees on the one truth of divine doctrine, and is bound by the bond of the same religion. Under it are thus included individual churches, disposed in towns and villages according to human need, so that each rightly has the name and authority of the church.

So what are the sacraments that the church agrees on?

Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, OHCAC East/West, Anglicans, Episcopalians, Methodist have sacraments…are they the church?

Some Christians have no sacraments they have ordinances, are they the church.

What are these sacraments and how they defined in the church universal?

Urgent, Urgent, emergency urgent…Foreigner…and this stuff you provide is as Foreign…

 

[Lincoln7]

So the authority is Calvin, a Catholic lawyer, whose father was excommunicated from the OHCAC for embezzelment and Calvin a murderer…OK…

Ad Hominem. The latter being unfounded.

Discussing the moral character of persons solves nothing here, has every pope been a man of first class character? No. Being consistent you should reject their teachings too then? Let’s keep it focused on issues here, not people.

So what are the sacraments that the church agrees on?

Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, OHCAC East/West, Anglicans, Episcopalians, Methodist have sacraments…are they the church?

Some Christians have no sacraments they have ordinances, are they the church.

What are these sacraments and how they defined in the church universal?

Urgent, Urgent, emergency urgent…Foreigner…and this stuff you provide is as Foreign…

With respect sir/ma’m, I don’t see why this has descended into provocative sarcasm. I am here for discussion of our respective views.

Regards

Lincs.

 

[CopticChristian]

Ad Hominem. The latter being unfounded.

Discussing the moral character of persons solves nothing here, has every pope been a man of first class character? No. Being consistent you should reject their teachings too then? Let’s keep it focused on issues here, not people.

With respect sir/ma’m, I don’t see why this has descended into provocative sarcasm. I am here for discussion of our respective views.

Regards

Lincs.

Lincs,

Forgive me. Then what are the sacraments?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Church Visible and Invisible: Calvin here: rbvincent.com/BibleStudies/churchvisible.htm
Or it’s the institutes Book IV, Chapter 1 if you wish to go to ccel. (remember you saying something about avoiding links on here Gary)

The consistent teaching of justification by Grace alone, through faith alone.

Lincs.

Which is fine if this is the paradigm you choose to believe. However, look how much scrutiny this comes under just from Protestants. Never mind the Apostolic Churchs. How in the world could you get this to grow?

You statement is “it exists across denominational boundaries” by that definition so does the Poisonous Snake handlers down in NC searching for the HS.

What make’s this paradigm “the church” all should hail too?

In other words why should we all go to your paradigm of a church and not for example the Lutheran church?

Follow what I am saying? What makes John Calvin more reliable than Luther?

Come on LInc the “elect” ? God wants all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4).

Linc, opponents argue a omniscient, omnipotent, and all-loving Creator would not and could not fail to save all of humanity. Do they not have a point?

So God will save all those whom he has purposed to save, and damn those he has purposed to damn. Your Free Will exists in joining Calvins theology class?

I gotta tell ya I love you Bro. If we were talking “anything” but this …oh and the snake handlers

 

[Lincoln7]

Lincs,

Forgive me. Then what are the sacraments?

Forgiven. We can all get excited or heated here, I would be lying to say I have not done as much.

Again I follow broadly in the reformed camp and stick with Baptism and The Eucharist as the only sacraments of the new covenant.

Regards

Lincs.

 

[Lincoln7]

Hi Gary,

Which is fine if this is the paradigm you choose to believe. However, look how much scrutiny this comes under just from Protestants. Never mind the Apostolic Churchs. How in the world could you get this to grow?

Just as the catholic teaching on ecclesiology is fine if it is the paradigm you choose to believe, however look how much scrutiny this comes under from Protestants and orthodox. Same argument Gary I suppose, we all must make a decision on it…

You statement is “it exists across denominational boundaries” by that definition so does the Poisonous Snake handlers down in NC searching for the HS.

My point being that the elect of God will exist in multiple churches and movements…

In other words why should we all go to your paradigm of a church and not for example the Lutheran church?

Why should I go to yours and not an Orthodox church or a Lutheran one? I adhere to a more reformed church as I am convinced it reflects biblical teaching. If others have other conclusions, I enjoy polite dialouge, hence why I’m here!

Come on LInc the “elect” ? God wants all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4).

What’s Paul on about then when referring to the “elect” in Romans 8:33, Romans 9:11, Romans 11:7, 2 Timothy 2:10, Titus 1:1? What then is the purpose of Romans 9?

So God will save all those whom he has purposed to save, and damn those he has purposed to damn.

Touchy topic, easy to misunderstand, ligonier has an article here: ligonier.org/learn/articles/double-predestination/

I gotta tell ya I love you Bro. If we were talking “anything” but this …oh and the snake handlers

Ha thanks Gary

Lincs.

 

[CopticChristian]

Forgiven. We can all get excited or heated here, I would be lying to say I have not done as much.

Again I follow broadly in the reformed camp and stick with Baptism and The Eucharist as the only sacraments of the new covenant.

Regards

Lincs.

Lincs,

Then as the OP says authority in the Catholic or Protestant paradigm we have the following

Authorities of churches Reformed, Lutheran, Anglican, Methodist, Baptist, Menoninite, etc…

Recall that the synod of Dort declared all that are not Calvinist as heretics therefore we have the Reformed and everyone else is a heretic…

I cannot ascribe that the Reformed represent anything that mimics any kind of authority.

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by Lincoln7
2 Thessolonians 2:15: Does the verse give any indication that the traditions here are separate from what is contained in writing?

Here is where many Protestants fail miserably and it is due to their history of kicking Traditions to the curb due to a false teaching of the Bible-Alone.

You pit Scripture against Tradition and that in itself is bogus.

 

[CopticChristian]

Here is where many Protestants fail miserably and it is due to their history of kicking Traditions to the curb due to a false teaching of the Bible-Alone.

You pit Scripture against Tradition and that in itself is bogus.

Nice,

Now I get the part about Tradition…and the part about Scripture…where do I find bogus in the Bible alone?

 

[Lincoln7]

CopticChristian,

Recall that the synod of Dort declared all that are not Calvinist as heretics therefore we have the Reformed and everyone else is a heretic…

In its 5th head of doctrine, article 15 it uses the word “heretic”, the only time the word is used in the canons. It uses it against those who do not adhere to the perseverance of the saints. I’m yet to do more study on it all in context.
Remember certain catholic documents have used similar terms for all outside its visible structure however…

Regards

Lincs.

 

[Lincoln7]

Here is where many Protestants fail miserably and it is due to their history of kicking Traditions to the curb due to a false teaching of the Bible-Alone.

You pit Scripture against Tradition and that in itself is bogus.

Or it’s because apparent apostolic traditions, such as the infallibility of a papacy, temporal punishment due to sins in purgatory, and various Marian modern doctrines (not the use of the term Theotokos btw) have no basis in the sacred scriptures or in the very earliest fathers? If they really have always been believed, something Vatican 1 clearly states, which Trent so clearly stated in session 4, the “unwritten traditions”, aka those not contained in scripture, then we ask to be shown clear evidence for them… We just don’t see them in early church history or inspired scripture.

I don’t 'pit them against each other, rather seems tradition seems to fluctuate and change, it is tested to that which is reliable; scripture. I don’t throw it all out and ignore it, I read it, but still it is subservient to the word of God from my perspective.

Kind regards

Lincs.

 

[PRmerger]

The scripture is what is inspired and infallible, not the canon list…

That is a distinction without any relevance, Lincs.

Even if the canon is not inspired, what difference does that make? You cite it with enough confidence to believe that it comes from God, no?

Well I keep asking for unequivocal proof that if Tradition is another God Breathed source, that it be demonstrated that modern catholic dogmas are universal beliefs in church history…

Your quoting from the letter to the Hebrews isn’t proof enough of Sacred Tradition?

 

[CopticChristian]

Or it’s because apparent apostolic traditions, such as the infallibility of a papacy, temporal punishment due to sins in purgatory, and various Marian modern doctrines (not the use of the term Theotokos btw) have no basis in the sacred scriptures or in the very earliest fathers? If they really have always been believed, something Vatican 1 clearly states, which Trent so clearly stated in session 4, the “unwritten traditions”, aka those not contained in scripture, then we ask to be shown clear evidence for them… We just don’t see them in early church history or inspired scripture.

I don’t 'pit them against each other, rather seems tradition seems to fluctuate and change, it is tested to that which is reliable; scripture. I don’t throw it all out and ignore it, I read it, but still it is subservient to the word of God from my perspective.

Kind regards

Lincs.

Lincs,

So here is the question have you studied in detail one Marian doctrine to the degree you have paid allegiance to Lampe in this dialogue. Take one, study it, find out how in the world people like Neuman, Scott Hahn, etc came to understand what you do not understand…as you see it now Tradition seems to fluctuate as you say…but have you truly studied what you are commenting on?

 

[PRmerger]

So scripture is at least materially sufficient, if all the Traditon is contained in it?

Yes, Catholics believe in the material sufficiency of Scripture (that is, all doctrines are found implicitly or explicitly in Scripture.)

Paul had no knowledge of such teachings

You cannot know what Paul had knowledge of Lincs! As if!

We are agreed, though that Paul’s oral teachings simply could not have been contained in the Scriptures, right? Reason tells us that the sheer number of his spoken word could not have been written in their entirety–on that, we are agreed, yes?

Look at this:
[BIBLEDRB]Acts 19:8[/BIBLEDRB]

Logic tells us that 3 months of preaching simply could not have been written in its entirety.

 

[mackbrislawn]

Mackbrislawn,

Quite so, this is our dilemma. It’s why I am participating here, mostly to show the argument that Protestants need the certaintity of an infallible guide doesn’t hold water, as it works both ways and virtually ends discussion.

Because the word of God clearly carries authority, because it testifies that Jesus Christ established a church here on earth.

Regards

Lincs.

But of course Protestants do need and have an infallible guide, scripture. They call it the word of God. We all go by the word of God, although Catholics don’t limit the word of God to scripture.

An outside observer would wonder what good scripture does if the reader of it is fallible. And you make the same argument about the church, so it works both ways. The lady said, “You can’t fool me, it’s turtles all the way down.” But it doesn’t go all the way down–it stops in our own minds, with our own personal predelictions.

Some people find inconsistencies in the church, so it can’t be infallible. Some people find inconsistencies in scripture, so it can’t be infallible. The word of God, by defintion, carries authority. But how do we identify what the word of God is? Then how do we decide what it means? Ultimately, we decide in our own minds.

Unless you’re a mystic. Then you don’t need scripture nor church.