Authority in Catholicism and Protestantism..

[anthony022071]

I have given my musings on this above, but to continue with evidence that means I hold the view I do, let’s look at some other sources that Lampe lists in his pretty extensive work; Ignatius of Antioch, renowned for his support and writings on the office of bishop, in his letter to the Romans, makes no mention of a monarchial bishop, which I find most odd if one is present: earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-romans-lightfoot.html

So my evidence then, is the clear description by Hermas of plurality government in Rome, specifically relating to the period we are discussing. The plural nature of the letter itself mentioned in the first line “the church that is in Rome…” sends the letter, not a single individual. And the absence in the Ignatian material sent to Rome of a bishop (6), most unusual considering Ignatius’ fame for his praise of said role.

It is not odd,considering that the Church of Rome was illegal and persecuted,and the bishops of Rome were marked for death by the state. It was not until after the Edict of Toleration of 311 that the bishops of Rome could safely be acknowledged publicly. 33 of the first 34 popes are believed to have been martyred.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Well the dialogue has been interesting Linc, course I disagree that “scripture doesnt align with Catholic teachings”. Perhaps in discernment some will take the time to seek the truth and actually read Catholic teaching, instead of being so quick to flock to “anything” which has a scent of opposition.

Unfortuante yet not difficult to see that this takes many individuals a great portion of their life to come to terms with, as we see with Blessed John Henry Newman and so many others. Also noted some never do.

The Protestant agruement of “many branchs from the Tree” hasn’t stood the test of time nor has it proved to be a reality, nor hold water in debate. The same agruments plus new come in different forms and degrees from the new-wave protestants, like the “Rapture” another Sola Scriptura wonder. Nothing new which hasn’t been revealed. Systematic attacks in pride are all the same path through the years in following the reformation. Nothing new under the Sun as Solomon stated.

The Tradition existed before anything was documented, and as its often stated had the Early Church Fathers been here today, they would immediately recognize the Liturgy of the Eucharist. I don’t believe we can even begin to say the same about the Reformed Church. Though I believe the ECFs comments on the “new” theology would be interesting. The reality Rome exists and is documented back to the 1st century is evidence its always existed, and the intellect of the Early Church Fathers certainly isn’t in question, genius existed as we see. Thus there is no reason to believe the Primacy and Magesterium didn’t exist, very much to the contrary, be it in various forms of evolving.

I find its facinating that the “The Shepherd of Hermas” becomes a constant, why not “Acts of Andrew” with the Immaculate Conception then? Oh neither one are “Canon”. Hmm, those Catholic teachings which some claim don’t align with scripture yet existed since before scripture are interesting.

As the Lord states; “I pray that they will be one, as you and I” and “No Kingdom divided against itself can stand”.

The path can only be approached with an open mind, to read anything Catholic with a preconceived notion it is wrong, will be an utter waste of time.

The Church/Christ Eucharist and Mary exist because they have always existed and always will. So too will there always be Saints to point to the path.

 

[KathleenGee]

To not believe in Mary’s Immaculate Conception reflects the great loss of not being members in Christ’s Church, and knowing the lives of the saints as well as the work of Mary in the Church beginning in the 2nd Century.

There is cumulative work of the mystics and spiritual directors that help us understand the walk of perfection — union with God, and the stages of purgation and illumination – knowing who we are not but who Christ is, that guide and encourage us to come closer to God.

There is this great missive as well by those who hold such doubts…faith lacking certitude, that assume this dogma happened immediately…

The belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity was held by ancient Christians, but the dogma was not declared until the mid-1800’s. Understanding the walk in perfection, we can see that Mary truly followed Jesus and did not have the purgation of sin in her life like us, and was worthy of being assumed into heaven…whether she fell asleep or died…is mystery…but we know she followed His glorious resurrection with her assumption.

Not knowing the effects of the Eucharist, of penance, of carrying the Cross, or our spirituality, it is hard for non-Catholics to understand Mary’s perpetual virginity.

 

[Patavium]

To not believe in Mary’s Immaculate Conception reflects the great loss of not being members in Christ’s Church, and knowing the lives of the saints as well as the work of Mary in the Church beginning in the 2nd Century.

There is cumulative work of the mystics and spiritual directors that help us understand the walk of perfection — union with God, and the stages of purgation and illumination – knowing who we are not but who Christ is, that guide and encourage us to come closer to God.

There is this great missive as well by those who hold such doubts…faith lacking certitude, that assume this dogma happened immediately…

The belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity was held by ancient Christians, but the dogma was not declared until the mid-1800’s. Understanding the walk in perfection, we can see that Mary truly followed Jesus and did not have the purgation of sin in her life like us, and was worthy of being assumed into heaven…whether she fell asleep or died…is mystery…but we know she followed His glorious resurrection with her assumption.

Not knowing the effects of the Eucharist, of penance, of carrying the Cross, or our spirituality, it is hard for non-Catholics to understand Mary’s perpetual virginity.

Yes, and there is evidence of it. The problem is that when you only believe in sola scriptura, you do not listen to the fullness of traditions (which include the bible), and beliefs of the Early Church. The same traditions, and beliefs that are passed generation from generation in the RCC. The bible must be understood with the other traditions, which do not contradict each other.

God bless! Kathleen!

 

[mackbrislawn]

Are the protestant churches not following the orthodox protestant though a reformation against the orthodox protestant church?

You’ve nailed it.

By the very paradigm of Protestantism, they are compelled to continue reforming. The first Protestants split from the Catholic Church, but subsequent Protestants have only the orthodox Protestants to split from, so they do so. Until groups like the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses split from Protestantism itself!

In the paradigm of Protestantism, there is no way to know when to stop protesting and reforming. It just goes on and on. Continued reductionism until there is nothing left.

Such are the fruits of Protestantism. By their fruits you shall know them.

 

[Patavium]

You’ve nailed it.

By the very paradigm of Protestantism, they are compelled to continue reforming. The first Protestants split from the Catholic Church, but subsequent Protestants have only the orthodox Protestants to split from, so they do so. Until groups like the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses split from Protestantism itself!

In the paradigm of Protestantism, there is no way to know when to stop protesting and reforming. It just goes on and on. Continued reductionism until there is nothing left.

Such are the fruits of Protestantism. By their fruits you shall know them.

I like how you complemented it!. God Bless!

 

[kwortham]

And here lies the million dollar question - which church??

If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect. - Successor to Peter - Saint Clement of Rome - Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1 [95 A.D.].

You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force. Saint Ignatius - Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [108 A.D.])

But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles. Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition - St. Irenaeus - Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 185]).

 

[benjohnson]

anthony022071,
Without an infallible authority,the Church would be like a ship without a rudder. False doctrines would spread unchecked through human error and at the instigation of the devil,and the Church would be subverted. .

Hey… V II wasn’t that bad.

On a serious note SSPX members have made a science of splitting the Authentic Magisterium from Ordinary Magisterium. From an outsiders point of view, their work has been good and solid.

 

[benjohnson]

Saying you’re a Christ follower essentially tells us nothing.

For me, when someone tells me that they’re a follower of Christ, it tells me the singularly most important thing about them.

 

[PRmerger]

For me, when someone tells me that they’re a follower of Christ, it tells me the singularly most important thing about them.

What does it tell you?

Do you know what he believes about divorce and re-marriage?
What about baptism?
Abortion?
Does he believe he’s saved? Can he lose his salvation? Or is it guaranteed?
Are they going to be “raptured”?
What about the Trinity? Is he trinitarian? Unitarian? Christadelphian? JW?
Does he use grape juice at his Lord’s Supper?
Does he think it’s really, really important to know that God’s name is Jehovah?
Does he think it’s really, really important to celebrate the Lord’s Day on the Sabbath?
What about music in his worship services? Does he believe that’s an abomination?
Are women serving as pastors at his services?
Does he believe that the Pauline epistles are inspired?

Truly, Ben, you know absolutely NOTHING about this person when he says he’s a “Christ follower”. Some of the above questions are vitally important to one’s salvation–none are minutiae that are irrelevant.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You’ve nailed it.

By the very paradigm of Protestantism, they are compelled to continue reforming. The first Protestants split from the Catholic Church, but subsequent Protestants have only the orthodox Protestants to split from, so they do so. Until groups like the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses split from Protestantism itself!

In the paradigm of Protestantism, there is no way to know when to stop protesting and reforming. It just goes on and on. Continued reductionism until there is nothing left.

Such are the fruits of Protestantism. By their fruits you shall know them.

Better known as “modern theology” which has lead us to Gay Marriage, a severe attack on Religious Freedom by “Christians” no less, and while a constant state of war looms. Slam up job we’ve done here. Full speed ahead with the modern evolution of Gods teaching, mixed with mans understanding.

 

[benjohnson]

What does it tell you?

Abortion?
Does he believe he’s saved? Can he lose his salvation? Or is it guaranteed?
Are they going to be “raptured”

I see where you’re coming from - in that many people who profess to follow Christ are really just following their own made-up path of feel-good sophism and tacking on a layer of false legitimacy.

How about this: When someone is truly following Christ, it tells me the most important thing about them.

 

[benjohnson]

Better known as “modern theology” which has lead us to Gay Marriage, a severe attack on Religious Freedom by “Christians” no less, and while a constant state of war looms. Slam up job we’ve done here. Full speed ahead with the modern evolution of Gods teaching, mixed with mans understanding.

But I would like to point out that just because the Catholic church has valid authority and valid teaching, that it’s members can cause as much damage as the wayward Protestants you validly critique.

Senator Nancy Pelosi and HHS director Kathleen Sebelius come to mind. If I didn’t respect you, would ordinarily repeat the “By your fruits you shall know them” a previous Catholic gave to me a few posts up, but as you can see, that is gorssly unfair.

While the Catholic church doesn’t have much of a crisis of valid doctrine - it too has a crisis of effective promulgation of that doctrine, just as my own Lutheran church does.

If I had a recommendation, let us go to our individual churches and do our best to help our own respective brothers with gaining wisdom to see the truth.

 

[PRmerger]

I see where you’re coming from - in that many people who profess to follow Christ are really just following their own made-up path of feel-good sophism and tacking on a layer of false legitimacy.

How about this: When someone is truly following Christ, it tells me the most important thing about them.

What does it tell you about his belief in divorce and re-marriage?

What does it tell you about his belief in sin and salvation?

What does it tell you about his belief in the salvation of Jews?

 

[KathleenGee]

We don’t split up…earliest Christians made vows after Mass not to commit adultery…and we don’t split up from each other.

Doesn’t mean we have to like each other.

But our unity is in Christ, not among ourselves.

 

[benjohnson]

What does it tell you about his belief in divorce and re-marriage?

What does it tell you about his belief in sin and salvation?

What does it tell you about his belief in the salvation of Jews?

I don’t claim that knowing that they truly follow Jesus will tell me everything, only that witch is most important. If I could choose to know one thing about an individual, that would probably be my choice.

 

[benjohnson]

Such are the fruits of Protestantism. By their fruits you shall know them.

Be careful with the logic of condemning one group for the sins of another. As the fruits of Catholicism was the Reformation.

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t claim that knowing that they truly follow Jesus will tell me everything, only that witch is most important. If I could choose to know one thing about an individual, that would probably be my choice.

I get what you’re saying. If I met someone on an airplane and he told me that he was a follower of Jesus then I’d certainly have a positive attitude about that.

But, the point is that having “Christ follower” in your profile here tells us absolutely nothing, essentially, about someone’s beliefs.

Just like hearing someone say, “I believe what’s in the Bible.” That’s also a nebulous statement devoid of, essentially, any insight.

 

[benjohnson]

But, the point is that having “Christ follower” in your profile here tells us absolutely nothing, essentially, about someone’s beliefs.

Ok… I think I get it, I have met people that claimed to be following christ, when in reality, they were doing their best avoid him at all costs.

I count myself lucky that I think I’m even vaguely pointed in the right direction of following Christ.

 

[PRmerger]

Ok… I think I get it, I have met people that claimed to be following christ, when in reality, they were doing their best avoid him at all costs.

I count myself lucky that I think I’m even vaguely pointed in the right direction of following Christ.