Biblical Proof of Church Authority...Tell it to the Church

[JonNC]

Because it is not concievable that there is error in the Teaching of Christ’s true and protected Church. The Power to bind and loose remember?

James, Circular argument, in that you assume facts not in evidence that the CC is Christ’s true and protected Church.
Even the binding and loosing you presume to follow apostolic succession necessarily. Once again; facts not in evidence.
(I also think you are overstating the purpose of binding and loosing.)

Even if a teaching, or practice is later changed it doesn’t necessarily follow that the prior teaching was wrong for those who followed it.

This, the changing or development of new understandings of prior teachings, which I believe is a fairly recent position by the CC, is (name removed by moderator)art the door through which the HS may guide unity.

Jon

 

[trustinyou]

]

Hi James,
FOr discussion’s sake, let’s agree that Christ gave authority to the Church.
Questions:

1. Why the Catholic Church under the Bishop of Rome? Why not the Orthodox Church?
2. As you might suspect, I believe that the Catholic Church fell into (some) error in the middle ages. Why is it not possible that the Lutheran Church (Evangelical Catholic Church) now holds that mantle of authority because confessional Lutheranism is the Church Catholic - rightly formed?
3. Why can it not be said that the Authority is held by all Christian communities that have a valid trinitarian Baptism, because it is conceivable that all of us have some error in our teaching?
   you say the cc fell into some error in the middle ages,Was it (some) of their teachings,or (some) of their behavior?

 

[JonNC]

]

you say the cc fell into some error in the middle ages,Was it (some) of their teachings,or (some) of their behavior?

More behavior than teaching, I might say, but some of both. And much of the behavior might have been because of poor teaching.
Regardless, error was certainly there, and if I didn’t think there was some error in the CC, I’d be Catholic.
I think the Catholic Church today teaches much truth, mixed with some error.

Jon

 

[TriuneUnity]

]

Hi James,
FOr discussion’s sake, let’s agree that Christ gave authority to the Church.
Questions:

1. Why the Catholic Church under the Bishop of Rome? Why not the Orthodox Church?
2. As you might suspect, I believe that the Catholic Church fell into (some) error in the middle ages. Why is it not possible that the Lutheran Church (Evangelical Catholic Church) now holds that mantle of authority because confessional Lutheranism is the Church Catholic - rightly formed?
3. Why can it not be said that the Authority is held by all Christian communities that have a valid trinitarian Baptism, because it is conceivable that all of us have some error in our teaching?

you say the cc fell into some error in the middle ages,Was it (some) of their teachings,or (some) of their behavior?

I would second Jon’s comments here. The problem with Roman teaching is not much the amount of error but the degree of error.

 

[JRKH]

Boy I wish I had more time to really develop answers and do some of the research for this. Since I can’t i may be throwitn things our here out of order or whatever. Bear with me friends.
I appreciate everyones commnets. Though we may be getting a bit off topic.
The thrust of my OP is that there is a pretty clear thread of evidence in the Gospels that Jesus Founded a Church, with Authority, With His protection, One that we are expected to Obey, and that He had not told the Apostles (Church leaders) everything He wanted to at teh time of the ascention.
Do we pretty well agree on this much?

Peace
James

 

[TriuneUnity]

Boy I wish I had more time to really develop answers and do some of the research for this. Since I can’t i may be throwitn things our here out of order or whatever. Bear with me friends.
I appreciate everyones commnets. Though we may be getting a bit off topic.
The thrust of my OP is that there is a pretty clear thread of evidence in the Gospels that Jesus Founded a Church, with Authority, With His protection, One that we are expected to Obey, and that He had not told the Apostles (Church leaders) everything He wanted to at teh time of the ascention.
Do we pretty well agree on this much?

Peace
James

Yes, I think so. Your last sentence may require some expanding on. Of course, the Holy Spirit pouring out on the apostles and disciples was the final act of apostolic revelation (‘the Comforter will lead you into all truth, etc.’.)

 

[thecourt]

Were those 12 cardinals called of God or one day years decide I want to be a priest, advancing (still not called by God as was Aaron) toward the position they hold?

Yes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has its worldwide leadership, none of whom decided one I want to be a apostle — the same is applicable to the local bishops, stake presidents and branch presidents worldwide. If the men in any of these positions had their way, they would be in the pews next to theri spouses and someone would be in the calling they now — a big distinction from the current pope and all the cardinals and bishops and priests who one decided they wanted to become a priest.

The priesthood is received from who have authority to bestow on other men – not a priesthood holder one day said I want to be a priesthood holder, and yes I want to be a stake president, a very involved priesthood leadership calling.

Your attempts to convince me Catholicism is the true church of Jesus Christ are in vain.

 

[JRKH]

Were those 12 cardinals called of God or one day years decide I want to be a priest, advancing (still not called by God as was Aaron) toward the position they hold?

Yes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has its worldwide leadership, none of whom decided one I want to be a apostle — the same is applicable to the local bishops, stake presidents and branch presidents worldwide. If the men in any of these positions had their way, they would be in the pews next to theri spouses and someone would be in the calling they now — a big distinction from the current pope and all the cardinals and bishops and priests who one decided they wanted to become a priest.

i really dislike it when someone comes on a thread and then basically does not listen to what is being said to them.
You will note in my answer to your previous post that I explained that men generally “called” to the priesthood by God, they don’t “decide” to become priests as you seem to insist. If you wish to learn here then please read and comprehend.

The priesthood is received from who have authority to bestow on other men – not a priesthood holder one day said I want to be a priesthood holder, and yes I want to be a stake president, a very involved priesthood leadership calling.

Your attempts to convince me Catholicism is the true church of Jesus Christ are in vain.

I really don’t see why your posting here on this thread. You have not addressed anything in the OP, and state quite clearly that you are not open to even considering an open and charitable discussion of the evidence I presented in that OP.
If you wish to contribute to the actual topic discussion that’s fine, join right in, but the number of Bishops/Cardinals has nothing whatever to do with “Tell it to the Church”, and your knowledge of the Church is so limited that you might learn more by just lurking rather than trying to participate.

If I have misunderstood you, I apologize.

Peace
James

 

[JonNC]

I really don’t see why your posting here on this thread. You have not addressed anything in the OP, and state quite clearly that you are not open to even considering an open and charitable discussion of the evidence I presented in that OP.
If you wish to contribute to the actual topic discussion that’s fine, join right in, but the number of Bishops/Cardinals has nothing whatever to do with “Tell it to the Church”, and your knowledge of the Church is so limited that you might learn more by just lurking rather than trying to participate.
If I have misunderstood you, I apologize.

 

[JRKH]

Yes, I think so. Your last sentence may require some expanding on. Of course, the Holy Spirit pouring out on the apostles and disciples was the final act of apostolic revelation (‘the Comforter will lead you into all truth, etc.’.)

OK I get you re: the last sentance. Lets leave that for the moment - Whole 'nuther potential thread…

Since we have an, at least tacit, agreement on:
Jesus Founded a Church
with Authority,
With His protection,
One that we are expected to Obey,
and that He had not told the Apostles (Church leaders) everything He wanted to at teh time of the ascention.

Would we also agree that this Church was built upon the shoulders of the Apostles and that those apostles had the authority to appoint others to teach and to lead? In other word to succeed them in ministry with full apostolic authority?

Peace
James

 

[trustinyou]

More behavior than teaching, I might say, but some of both. And much of the behavior might have been because of poor teaching.
Regardless, error was certainly there, and if I didn’t think there was some error in the CC, I’d be Catholic.
I think the Catholic Church today teaches much truth, mixed with some error.

Jon

jon. how does one know that the cc is teaching in error?(theres no doubt that behavior is a problem with us all,Jesus said this would happen)…you’ll probably say scripture,but how do you know that,how do you know that your church correctly interpets scripture…just my opine, but i believe,some error,was taught,and is taught today in the cc,but not due to the magestrium or the catechism of the church,but by people, rather they be priests or lay people,that are just ignorant of the facts or teachings…

 

[TriuneUnity]

OK I get you re: the last sentance. Lets leave that for the moment - Whole 'nuther potential thread…

Since we have an, at least tacit, agreement on:
Jesus Founded a Church
with Authority,
With His protection,
One that we are expected to Obey,
and that He had not told the Apostles (Church leaders) everything He wanted to at teh time of the ascention.

Would we also agree that this Church was built upon the shoulders of the Apostles and that those apostles had the authority to appoint others to teach and to lead? In other word to succeed them in ministry with full apostolic authority?

Peace
James

I would agree with everything you said up to “with full apostolic authority.” There were things the apostles did that died with them. Examples would be: signs to back up their claim to authority; the full inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon their teachings (i.e. direct revelation).

 

[JRKH]

I would agree with everything you said up to “with full apostolic authority.” There were things the apostles did that died with them. Examples would be: signs to back up their claim to authority; the full inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon their teachings (i.e. direct revelation).

I would be interested in the evidence that you have to back up this statement.
How do you know that “Certain things died with (the apostles)”?

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I would agree with everything you said up to “with full apostolic authority.” There were things the apostles did that died with them. Examples would be: signs to back up their claim to authority; the full inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon their teachings (i.e. direct revelation).

OK, so leadership of The Church (Protected by Christ’s Promise) was passed on to those the Apostles appointed.

Peace
James

 

[TriuneUnity]

I would be interested in the evidence that you have to back up this statement.
How do you know that “Certain things died with (the apostles)”?

Peace
James

Well, we know that only their writings were given the charism of divine inspiration. Only they received direct revelation. Would you agree on this one? I know Rome officially teaches this as well.

The Apostles were given power over sicknesses and demons and authority to preach. The Seventy were given power over sicknesses and demons and authority to preach (Lk 10:9,17). The Seventy received the same assurance as the apostles, "He that listens to you, listens to me (Lk 10:16).

The Apostles could give spiritual gifts to others through the laying on of hands (Acts 8:17 and 19:6, 2 Timothy 1:6). Apostles were identified by the signs of an apostle (2 Cor 12:12). It appears that only the Apostles were able to give such gifts to others, and that the giving of these gifts ended when there were no more apostles.

The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20). This is said of no one else. The twelve apostles have a special relation to Israel in time and in eternity (Mt 19:28,Ga1 2:7-9). This is not true of other New Testament ministers.

 

[TriuneUnity]

OK, so leadership of The Church (Protected by Christ’s Promise) was passed on to those the Apostles appointed.

Peace
James

Leadership in the church was passed on by the apostles. However, the office of the ministry itself is not based solely on the apostolic ministry. The apostolic ministry was one particular form of the office that never repeated itself and served a specific function. The disciples appointed by Christ, such as the Seventy, as well as unnamed disciples, were also ministers. The promises to the Church in many, many cases, applies to the entire Church and not just to the ministry or to those the apostles appointed.

Examples would be the great commission, the ministry of the keys was given to the Apostles (in 20:22). The ministry of the keys was also given to the church (Mt 18:17-20).

 

[JRKH]

Leadership in the church was passed on by the apostles.

So then we agree that The Leadership of the Church was passed on to those who followed the Original Apostles and that this is the same Church which Christ Promised to Protect and be with until the end of the age.
So if the Church leadership is validly passed on from the Apostles, it is logical to assume that those leaders are equally protected by Christ in areas of faith and morals. (Even if we assume they do not have all the same gifts.)

However, the office of the ministry itself is not based solely on the apostolic ministry. The apostolic ministry was one particular form of the office that never repeated itself and served a specific function. The disciples appointed by Christ, such as the Seventy, as well as unnamed disciples, were also ministers.

I really don’t see anything here that I would dispute, ot that would violate a Catholic understanding.
I won’t go any deeper into this because we could get mired in “semantics” (it’s happened to us before), and the issue I’m trying to explore is the Authority of The Church.

The promises to the Church in many, many cases, applies to the entire Church and not just to the ministry or to those the apostles appointed.

Examples would be the great commission, the ministry of the keys was given to the Apostles (in 20:22). The ministry of the keys was also given to the church (Mt 18:17-20).

I tend to agree with this, however it is also good to remember that we should be careful about “becoming teachers”

Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. (James 3:1)
This idea certainly can be applied to our own sense of “personal infallibility”, also known as pride, wouldn’t you say?

Peace
James

 

[JonNC]

jon. how does one know that the cc is teaching in error?(theres no doubt that behavior is a problem with us all,Jesus said this would happen)…you’ll probably say scripture,but how do you know that,how do you know that your church correctly interpets scripture…just my opine, …

Sure scripture is where we all turn first. Wouldn’t you claim that all Catholic teaching is scriptural? Wouldn’t you deny it if I said that this-or-that Catholic doctrine is unscriptural?

but i believe,some error,was taught,and is taught today in the cc,but not due to the magestrium or the catechism of the church,but by people, rather they be priests or lay people,that are just ignorant of the facts or teachings

So I will ask, how do you know the Magisterium or the Catholic Catechism is right? And you will say (I bet), it is protected by the HS. And, yes, I will ask, how do you know this? HOw do you know that the HS isn’t now, because of Catholic errors, protecting confessional Lutheranism, or Orthodoxy, or even perhaps protecting the truths that are in us all?

Jon

 

[cazayoux]

Some of our Protestant brothers will want to tell us that the “Church” not an “institution” but the entire body of believers. **If this is so then “Taking it to the Church” would be completed in step two where “Two or three witnesses” are called upon **and no third step would be required. But Christ did establish a third step, telling His disciples to submit such obstinate disputes to “The Church’ for resolution and that they must accept The Church’s judgment as final.
So how does Christ define His Church?

GREAT point.
I hadn’t thought of this tidbit before.
Thanks!

michel

 

[cazayoux]

I think the Catholic Church today teaches much truth, mixed with some error.

Jon

Okay, I’m curious …
Which parts, specifically, do you believe are in error?

michel