Christian Unity

[ferdie]

Each truth that one has can be used a stepping stone to the fullness of truth. Any of us will oppose coming to the fullness truth when we promote falsehoods, such as it was all just Christian at first, then the Catholic Church was created in the second century sometime. By doing this, people can miss out on the beautiful reality of the** authoritative Church built by Christ that is the exact way to unity, teaching one set of doctrine which is correct and true, giving the true and valid Sacraments that Christ established, etc., which was not preceded by any Christian church.** We oppose unity when we promote false ecumenism, like building relationships on falsehoods, like “your doctrine is just as valid as ours.” In truth, it is not. One made by Christ, the other(s) by men who are not God. As well meaning as these men may or may not have been, the two are not compatible and reconcilable. Christ’s way is the way to unity in Him. We should all be branches of the true Vine. There is only one True Vine, one Church, one true doctrine, one Eucharist. We must live on every word that comes from the mouth of God, doing what He asked us to do in order to be nourished and become fruitful branches of the vine. Telling people that it is simply okay to do it their own way, instead of God’s way, is a grave disservice to them and the rest of the Body of Christ.

I pray everyday that our separated brethrens will be given the grace to see and understand this. I pray that they connect one truth after another to see that the Catholic Church founded by no other man but the Lord, possess the fullness of divine revelations.
Understanding the Divine Authority of the Church is what brought me back.

 

[John1]

Each truth that one has can be used a stepping stone to the fullness of truth. Any of us will oppose coming to the fullness truth when we promote falsehoods, such as it was all just Christian at first, then the Catholic Church was created in the second century sometime. By doing this, people can miss out on the beautiful reality of the authoritative Church built by Christ that is the exact way to unity, teaching one set of doctrine which is correct and true, giving the true and valid Sacraments that Christ established, etc., which was not preceded by any Christian church. We oppose unity when we promote false ecumenism, like building relationships on falsehoods, like “your doctrine is just as valid as ours.” In truth, it is not. One made by Christ, the other(s) by men who are not God. As well meaning as these men may or may not have been, the two are not compatible and reconcilable. Christ’s way is the way to unity in Him. We should all be branches of the true Vine. There is only one True Vine, one Church, one true doctrine, one Eucharist. We must live on every word that comes from the mouth of God, doing what He asked us to do in order to be nourished and become fruitful branches of the vine. Telling people that it is simply okay to do it their own way, instead of God’s way, is a grave disservice to them and the rest of the Body of Christ.

I delight in the truths of God and I enjoy talking with fellow Christians about these truths. The Church teaches that the Protestants are part of the Body of Christ, and calls them “separated brethren” along with the Eastern Orthodox. I don’t think that the Church or anyone else is saying that it’s okay to do things there own way instead of God’s way. According to Vatican II, the Church regonizes the activty of the Holy Spirit in non-Catholic Christian communities and I think it’s wonderful that the Church is reaching out to our separated brethren. I don’t believe that the non-Catholic Christian congregations were started by men, in the sense that the Christians had the seeds of Christianity planted in their hearts from God. Maybe there the sheep from the other pen

 

[MDK]

I’m not confused or mistaken. I think you were missing my point from the outset. It was the “terminology” that I was refering to. When I said that the disciples were first called “Christians” at Antioch was I correct? When I said that the term “Catholic” was not used until the second century was I correct? I never said that the Church mentioned in the Bible was not the Church refered to as the Catholic Church in the second century. in the first century the church was refered to, at least in Paul’s letter to the Roman’s as the churches of Christ. In Romans 16:16 it states.

16(A) Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.

You read my original post and misunderstood my intent and I want to apologize to you for that. Maybe I was wrong about your intentions too. In Ephesians 4:1-4:1-6 says

1 I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all .

Peace be with you.

I love to forgive and move on, but not under false understanding. You seem to have come through now to understand, but no evidence of that before. I don’t mind forgiving, but I did not misunderstand what you wrote. You didn’t say the “term” Christian, you said the “Christian Church” predated the “Catholic Church.”

In the beginning of this, a post by “survive” included “The Church predates all these other groups and can point to historic backing for doctrines.”

This is a true statement by “survive.” The Church does predate all these groups, and no other Church came before it. Yet, you take it upon yourself to attempt to provide correction, writing “Actually the Christian Church predates the Catholic Church.”

The most generous interpretation would say that your statement is in error as written. It is simply not true. In context, the statement is used not to support, but to contradict, saying that “survive” was in some way incorrect. If the understanding was that “survive” statement was correct, then one may say, “yes, even though the Church wasn’t called Catholic until later.” So, there is no evidence I see to really support your now claimed intent, either.

If you want to apologize, please do so for writing in error… and not for my alleged misunderstanding. It is good to have humility.

 

[MDK]

I delight in the truths of God and I enjoy talking with fellow Christians about these truths. The Church teaches that the Protestants are part of the Body of Christ, and calls them “separated brethren” along with the Eastern Orthodox. I don’t think that the Church or anyone else is saying that it’s okay to do things there own way instead of God’s way. According to Vatican II, the Church regonizes the activty of the Holy Spirit in non-Catholic Christian communities and I think it’s wonderful that the Church is reaching out to our separated brethren. I don’t believe that the non-Catholic Christian congregations were started by men, in the sense that the Christians had the seeds of Christianity planted in their hearts from God. Maybe there the sheep from the other pen

It’s nice that you’re using Vatican II documents, and we must use them as intended and taught. Are your interpretations in line with the way the Church teaches?

Christ established that there is one Shepherd, one flock.

If these doctrines of other churches are not man made, then are you claiming that the Holy Spirit has taught doctrine and Sacraments to others different from Christ? Do you think the Holy Spirit established churches with doctrine and Sacraments different than the one Church built by Christ?

Please read with credit to Fr. William Most and Vatican II’s Decree on Ecumenism:

That fact that salvation is possible in this way does not mean that there should be no missions or attempts to bring back the Protestants. Richer and more secure means of salvation are to be had with formal explicit adherence to the Catholic Church. Therefore we need to make every effort. In regard to Ecumenism, it is good to keep in mind a rule from Vatican II, in its Decree on Ecumenism (# 11): “It is altogether necessary that the complete doctrine be clearly presented. Nothing is so foreign to true Ecumenism as that false peace-making in which the purity of Catholic doctrine suffers loss, and its true and certain sense is obscured.”

 

[MDK]

I pray everyday that our separated brethrens will be given the grace to see and understand this. I pray that they connect one truth after another to see that the Catholic Church founded by no other man but the Lord, possess the fullness of divine revelations.
Understanding the Divine Authority of the Church is what brought me back.

ferdie,
That’s a most beautiful sentiment, and could not be done as you have without being in Christ.