All good points & surely our Lord won’t fault anyone because they trust their church is instituted by Christ.
Aren’t you prejudging here, then, too?
Wait – so, you’re saying that the promises that Jesus made about the Church to the apostles failed even before the death of the apostles?!? That is, that they couldn’t get their oral teaching straight, so later generations had to fix it?!? OK… show me, in the Bible, where it makes that claim about itself, please!
Ahh… but did Jesus himself make those promises of correctness? And if so, then to whom, and in what context? I’d argue that He made precisely these promises, and through the Apostles!
He’s trying to say that, just as an OSAS person believes that nothing takes away salvation, a Catholic person believes that nothing takes away the truth of a doctrine.
This is true, but there’s also an underlying truth that it reveals. When a parent says something, the child should listen, because that parent has the authority and duty to teach and lead. Even if the parent’s answer isn’t “because I said so”, the assertion that the “said so” matters (and is valid) is itself true!
Exactly.
Yes, somewhat. It also entails because we have always said so…or that is what our fathers and forefathers said, or that’s the way we have always done it etc, etc. .Very similar to what the Jewish leaders told Jesus, citing forefathers, even tradition/ succession of sorts. Jesus was said to be different, or “new” or contrasting approach, daring to speak with authority etc…
Well, one might object, for many of the reformers were well educated Catholics, even clergy.
And you don’t think Calvinists cite salvation promises taught thru Jesus and the apostles?
No, am mot saying that at all. I referred to Luke’s words as to why he put it in writing. He writes,
Well more like no one can take away the teaching inerrancy of CC.
They do, and it’s a good opportunity to discuss the audience to whom these promises were made! (The standard Protestant assumption is “all of us”, but the texts show that Jesus’ audience was the apostles!)
There are! But… the ones we’re talking about here were made to the Church, through the apostles!
Agreed. And, in a use of the authority they had been given by Christ, they named successors to follow them in their ministry (and therefore, to fall under Christ’s promises). Others, who started their own churches / denominations, did not fall under these promises. So, the very witness of Scripture itself demonstrates that folks who think that they can start their own church and teach faithfully … are mistaken!
Fair enough. Yet… the Catholic Church can point to Jesus’ promises to the apostles. To whom can OSAS adherents point?
How do you know which camp you are in? Is your ‘teaching authority’ sound in all doctrine?
That’s a different ball of wax. The Church wouldn’t tell a mature believer, “because I said so.”
Far as I know the Church has always cited scripture where appropriate even the early Church Fathers cited the scripture they had. Read St Agustin of Hippo. He died in 430 AD, & he was citing scripture.
The Church points to councils, doctrines, & practices of the past only as evidence to convey the understanding of Christians of previous generations. not as proof in & of itself of said doctrine.
Again, this seems like a backwards concept to me. It’s like saying, forget what Jesus said, it is written here in Isaiah, or the Torah.
Thank you. St Luke said it much better than I did.
And so were the warnings/ conditions.
Then there is an awful lot of stuff lay people don’t need to heed. The last supper was only apostles only. By your rationale eucharust is only for clergy.
That is true, especially if original church kept faithful and therefore under such protection.
Thank you for the fair enough.OSAS has Jesus own words and apostles. Do you think they made no promises of assurance of salvation for individuals?
From Christ to the Apostles and then the sheep…Gorgias:
Then there is an awful lot of stuff lay people don’t need to heed. The last supper was only apostles only. By your rationale eucharust is only for clergy.
Understand your analogy but disagree. It is never backwards to go to the source or rule of scripture. Jesus didn’t mind it , in fact He and the apostles were armed with OT scripture.
Well, not a good way to start a sentence, and our actions will be judged by what is in our hearts. We will also be judged by the measure of light and talents He has given us.
Yes. And more, for He is the way, the Truth, and the Light.
No but they showed themselves approved by the handling and fulfilling of the Scriptures.
And how to begin our spiritual journey thru faith in Christ, the new birth, being born again into newness of life.
Not sure I follow.
Basically I’m saying Jesus taught his Apostles how to read and understand scripture & how it should be applied to the way they live their lives.
That’s what we say about Sacred Tradition. It is divinely inspired, received, kept, & understood.
No it has not ceased. It is with us today. Some just choose to ignore it
Cite the versus. No I believe Jesus made no “assurance” of salvation. I believe He said Many will say to me on that day,
Agreed! Yet, the ‘warnings’ didn’t include “ya’ll apostles will get it wrong”. If you can show where apostles get doctrine wrong, from Scriptural sources, as a doctrinal statement to the whole Church, I’d love to see it!
There’s a lot of stuff that bishops and priests need to heed. Agreed!
No…
All apostles are disciples. Not all disciples are apostles. Might we talk about the meanings of the words?
Does Christ not promise that His Church will “keep faithful”? Not individual members, mind you – but the Church He founded?
Do you have any citations that He did?
But I cannot say positively that this indicates a direct and unbroken line to the apostles is always necessary. I would think that theological succession from the apostles is ultimately more important than sacramental succession. In other words, the sacramental line of succession can, in my mind, be established or reestablished by those who adhere to the teaching of the apostles. We are true children of Abraham by faith, not by some sort of sacramental genealogy.
If sacramental succession was primary, the Church would not have found it necessary to develop its creeds.
The idea that because the apostles died, it is therefore necessary to pass their authority on to others does not seem to be supported by this passage from Hebrews:
The early believers were never without the Scriptures. They had the Old Testament from the very beginning. And even while Peter was still alive, he referred to Paul’s epistles as having scriptural authority:
When Jesus was tempted in the wilderness by Satan, he did not respond with the words “according to tradition.” He said, “It is written.” And in his Sermon on the Mount, he spoke out against the traditions of the elders: “You have heard that it was said… but I say to you.” Jesus himself, according to Pope Benedict XVI, was the new Torah.