Church Authority: Is it really just a guy in a hat?

[noma]

But then to say that no one is 100% right when speaking about faith and morals, is to imply that Christ is not 100% right.

No incomplete human can likely be 100% correct, nor can any institution that has as its membership humans (though this statement is itself at risk of being incorrect.)

The Gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church of Christ. I don’t think anymore that this includes all of the Roman Church, or all its teachings. Nor do I think this applies to infallibility at all.

 

[Image_of_God]

No incomplete human can likely be 100% correct, nor can any institution that has as its membership humans (though this statement is itself at risk of being incorrect.)

The Gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church of Christ. I don’t think anymore that this includes all of the Roman Church, or all its teachings. Nor do I think this applies to infallibility at all.

You continue to state that infallibililty is impeccabilty. You have been corrected before. The Pope is not 100% correct and sinless. It is the Spirit who is correct and it is He who functions through the Pope when the Pope is speaking excathedra.

Of course we know that falsehood comes from hell. If falsehood where to enter the Church, it would be from hell. You do not have the correct understanding of this verse.
*
Who is Peter to you then?*

 

[noma]

Who is Peter to you then?

The first person who was given this chrism of infallibility.

A chrism which he has the privilege to be first to hold, out of all believers. So we are all the pontifical successors of St. Peter.

And lies are not the only alternative to truth. The Roman Church, like any human institution, can make mistakes, and I think Satan uses the Roman Church’s mistakes more powerfully, to mislead more people, than most other errors.

The gates of hell may prevail against the Roman Church.

But not against Christ’s Church.

 

[Image_of_God]

The first person who was given this chrism of infallibility.

A chrism which he has the privilege to be first to hold, out of all believers. So we are all the pontifical successors of St. Peter.

And lies are not the only alternative to truth. The Roman Church, like any human institution, can make mistakes, and I think Satan uses the Roman Church’s mistakes more powerfully, to mislead more people, than most other errors.

The gates of hell may prevail against the Roman Church.

But not against Christ’s Church.

Lies are the only alternative to the truth. Mistakes are ways of learning the truth, or they can be ways of indulging in lies. So now you believe that most people of the Catholic Church are not saved?

 

[noma]

So now you believe that most people of the Catholic Church are not saved?

Not most who follow the rules. Probably most who enforce the rules.

Though I believe all people likely end up in heaven ultimately, unless they make an active, eternal, and everlasting decision to reject God, even from hell.

 

[Image_of_God]

Not most who follow the rules. Probably most who enforce the rules.

Though I believe all people likely end up in heaven ultimately, unless they make an active, eternal, and everlasting decision to reject God, even from hell.

I refuse to believe you since it seems as if you have made yourself God.

So, St. Gregory the Great, St. Leo the Great, St. Peter, St. Clement, and the Lord who very well created the Catholic Church, must now bow down to you?

I refuse to believe this. I follow the Lord not you.
I believe that the Lord is infallible and he speaks throught the Pope. The Pope is not infallible as you have implied. I am deeply disturbed by your comments that the Satan is using the Roman Church for his plans…

 

[noma]

As for the Eucharist:

I believe in transubstantiation. I believe that the bread and wine become the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.

I also believe that the matter is important, though I am confused still as to how important it is. Does it need to be wine? I don’t know.

But I do believe that Christ can no longer suffer, even as sacrifice, and so I think that if His body were to be defiled in any way, it would cease to become His body.

So when Protestants consume the body and blood of Christ, it remains so until it enters us spiritually.

When Protestants honor this body and blood, they can do so to the point of worshiping it, for anyone who has faith on Christ and the Scriptures which are His Word and Sacrament, that person can consecrate the host, using the words Jesus Christ taught us.

When Protestants flush the Eucharist down the sink, the miniute it risks being defiled, it becomes mere bread and wine. And so it doesn’t matter what happens to it. And I think we need not worry too much what happens to the bread and wine at that point; after all, it shows a love for God and trust that He would protect His son to discard what is no longer His body and blood.

But this is probably more appropriete for a different post.

 

[noma]

** The Beauty of the Roman Church **

I came to the Roman Church from atheism, as some people may know. I spent two wonderful years in it, attending every day Latin Mass in the Tridentine Rite from a wonderful church faithful to the Pope. I also every Sunday attended Divine Liturgy at a Byzantine Catholic Church nearby. I enjoyed the form of worship, and how Christ-centered it was. For those who would call Roman worship unchristian, they have a lot to learn about the Liturgy. Honor of Christ is everywhere, especially in the Saints, who are all miracles of Christ’s grace and sacrifice on the cross for our sins.

I loved the incense, the Eucharistic adoration, praying of the rosary, the beauty of confession, all of it. The sung divine liturgy on Pascha was probably the most beautiful worship I have ever been witness to in my life. The glory of the Lord Jesus Christ and His most holy Theotokos, Mary Immaculate, Seat of Wisdom, is shown there with radiance like the sun, where it would tear me to look upon it with my defiled eyes. The Eucharist was as honey to my lips, and life to my spirit.

** The Sadness in Leaving It **

But beauty is not enough. The Roman Church is filled with the virtues of faith and of hope. Its members with the virtue of love. But the Roman Church itself, in its rules, its laws, its morass of strictures and legislation, I have found to be without love.

And a lack of charity is the strongest mark of the lack of Truth: of humanness and worldliness.

So it is with sadness that I plan to leave the Roman Church. I will attend other places of worship, other Catholic Churches, like the Lutherans, the Orthodox Christians, the Anglicans especially. I will pray with them, and ask them (as I ask you) to pray for me.

Maybe I will return to the Roman Church, but I think it unlikely.

At Easter, if these doctrinal distinctions cannot be resolved, I will write a letter to the Bishop of Columbus asking him to formally excommunicate me, explaining that I have left the Roman Church without wish to return.

I enjoy this beauty to such a high degree, and would seek out anything like it in the future. So I will likely become a High Church Anglican (flowing in the opposite direction to Cardinal Newman) or an Orthodox Christian. Possibly a Lutheran.

I ask you to keep me in your prayers.

** My future with these forums **

I will continue to watch this thread, and respond to questions asked, but I have become confident enough to ardently declare my intentions to leave this Roman Church and to call myself a Protestant, proudly so, and an even truer Catholic, also proudly.

I will also continue to post where I can, participating in threads to add my views, though probably more in the forms of questions than declarations.

The strong declarations came from my testing what I have learned as a Catholic. I think that they hold water thus far. I will continue to ask questions, and to state interesting scenarios. I will argue for Christ’s Church, and against any falsehood that I see, even such that is apparent now to me within this Roman Church.

God bless you all, and thank you for a most entertaining discussion.

 

[Image_of_God]

I disagree greatly noma.

 

[Nick]

And a lack of charity is the strongest mark of the lack of Truth: of humanness and worldliness.

What exactly about Church teaching do you find to be uncharitable?

What I have got from reading this thread is essentially: " I really respect the Catholic Church, but some of the Church’s teachings just don’t seem right to me, and even though I cannot conclusively prove that they are in fact in error, I will assume that they are and thus find a church that is more adapted to my views of what Christianity should be like." Is this accurate? I don’t mean to sound condescending or rude, but this is just my impression.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Then we cannot dialogue unless you tell me what you are using to define “infallible” and “inerrant”.

The way I am using the terms is by seeing them as nearly identical. “Inerrant” means infallibility as it deals with writing. Infallibility means absence of error (not protection from the same).

But the gift of infallibility also implies protection from error, and this is given only when one speaks in accord with the will of God.

I hope this helps.

Maybe we can try again.

Do you stand by your statement from the OP?

all those in Christ’s Church, who put their faith on Christ, when they speak in accordance with His will, speak without error.

tee

 

[Randy_Carson]

Noma-

I’m not sure exactly where you’re coming from - your profile says you are Anglican, but in a post you said, “I came to the Roman Church”. Catholics don’t call themselves “Romans” - only Protestants call us that as a put-down. Again, I don’t know whether you attend a Catholic Church or an Anglican Church, so I’m not sure I understand what troubles you and what your intent is when you say you plan to leave.

All that aside, I’m going to address the issue of the authority of Peter - because that is the Genesis of the Authority of the Catholic Church.

You have already been directed to Matthew 16 - the “rock”, the keys and all that. I think if you read the passage carefully, you’ll see that there is no question that Jesus was speaking specifically to Peter alone in response to Peter’s profession of faith. By contrast, Jesus spoke to the Apostles as a group in Matthew 18 when He said, “I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 18:18) Verse 1 of this chapter shows that Jesus was speaking to the “disciples” not just Peter. So, there is a similarity and a distinction between what Jesus said to Peter and to the twelve.

Additionally, you can see Peter’s primacy clearly in John 21.

15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?”
“Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.”
16Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.”

17The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”

18Jesus said, “Feed my sheep. I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.” 19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!”

The next verse says, “Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them.” You see? Jesus and Peter were walking along the beach after breakfast talking alone and the disciple John was following at a distance.

Jesus, the Good Shepherd, leaves Peter in charge of His flock just before the Ascension. There is also the verse in Luke 22:

“Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you[a] as wheat. 32But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.” The “you” designated by the [a] is plural in the Greek, but the “you” designating Simon is not. Therefore, Jesus asked Simon to strengthen the other Apostles.

Peter, the rock, the kepha, was designated by Jesus to lead the Church. From Peter and his successors, the Popes, and the Bishops of the Catholic Church, Apostolic Authority continues to this day. Any other church offers a lesser gospel.

Paul extols Love, but do not be deceived. Cultists “love” people into the strangest of beliefs. Love apart from truth is not real love at all.

I understand that you may be leaving the Church and that you do not intend to return. I’m sorry to hear that, but I encourage you to read the writings of the Early Church Fathers in your time away so that you may make the connection between Peter and Benedict XVI.

I also suggest you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. There is no question about the love the Church bears witness to and expresses in this document. At the same time, like any father or mother, the Church must discipline its children and maintain order. This, too, is an expression of love.

Finally, you referenced “doctrinal distinctions” that must be resolved or you will seek formal excommunication. This was a long thread and I was reading quickly so I may have missed them…could you please enumerate briefly what specific doctrinal issues you have issue with?

What you have stated thus far (your perception of a lack of charity) is not a doctrinal objection.

 

[BlazingBolt]

From what I have seen her post, is seems to me that she believes that forbidding ABC equates to a lack of Charity. She was even teaching RCIA thinking ABC was morally neutral and that the Church’s position was not infallible and that it was therefore not binding on the faithful. She was arguing her position and even boasted that she wanted to be found in error, and that if she discovered the teaching was infallible she would immediately abandon ABC. Eventually when she realized she was wrong it hit her like a ton of Bricks. In her moment of Crisis she turned to her protestant family, what did she expect to happen? Instead of doing what she said she would do she denied the Churh’s authority and the very concept of infallibility. Basically she liked what they were telling her. I think she feels a little bit hurt and betrayed by the Church and maybe a litte bit angry because it tried to tell her that she was a sinner by using ABC. The Church however teaches us that we are all sinners and urges us to repent and turn from sin.

Noma, please correct anything I said that is in error. Also, I think you should ask yourself : Is their anything at all that could convince you to give up ABC? You thought there was before, but it was too difficult and instead you abandoned your religion. If Christ called you to abandon ABC and to follow him, could you do it? Or, would you question him, make him explain why, make him repeat himself, put it off, try to find loopholes, and tell him you believe in him at the same time?

You previously said that you believed that anyone who proclaims Christ is Lord is part of his Catholic Church with all your heart. I hope that is really true, because even when we want to believe something with all our heart, Christ infallibly knows the truth of what really is in our heart and will judge us based on that. We can lie to ourselves, but not to him.

Also I would like to point out that everyone from Branch Davidian’s to Satan himself proclaim that Christ is Lord.

 

[noma]

Noma, please correct anything I said that is in error. Also, I think you should ask yourself : Is their anything at all that could convince you to give up ABC?

First of all, I am a man.

Not that that’s exceptionally relevant, but there you go.

And no, there is probably nothing anymore that could be shown to me, unless it is clearly from Scripture, to cause me to abandon ABC.

But that is not why I am leaving the Roman Church. I am leaving it because there are a number of teachings given by the ordinary magisterium that I refuse to accept (ABC is not one of them).

I hold that some women can and should be priests.
I hold that people can take the Eucharist, and should, at protestant churches.
Roman Church’s communion should be open to all those who profess Christ as Lord and believe themselves in God’s grace. This includes many Lutherans, many Anglicans, and many other Protestants.
I hold that protestants are just as Christian as those of the Roman Church.
I hold that burning heretics is always wrong.
I hold that the Church should not have temporal power.
I hold that transubstantiation happens once the host is consumed, not before, and not after.
And a handful of other things.

 

[noma]

Maybe we can try again.

Do you stand by your statement from the OP?

tee

Yes.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Yes.

Okay.

all those in Christ’s Church, who put their faith on Christ, when they speak in accordance with His will, speak without error.

Why is the act of speech without error? Because of the speaker’s faith? Or because of the accord with Christ’s will?

tee

 

[noma]

Okay.

Why is the act of speech without error? Because of the speaker’s faith? Or because of the accord with Christ’s will?

tee

What is directly required is being in accord with Christ’s will.

 

[water]

First of all, I am a man.

Not that that’s exceptionally relevant, but there you go.

And no, there is probably nothing anymore that could be shown to me, unless it is clearly from Scripture, to cause me to abandon ABC.

But that is not why I am leaving the Roman Church. I am leaving it because there are a number of teachings given by the ordinary magisterium that I refuse to accept (ABC is not one of them).

I hold that some women can and should be priests.
I hold that people can take the Eucharist, and should, at protestant churches.
Roman Church’s communion should be open to all those who profess Christ as Lord and believe themselves in God’s grace. This includes many Lutherans, many Anglicans, and many other Protestants.
I hold that protestants are just as Christian as those of the Roman Church.
I hold that burning heretics is always wrong.
I hold that the Church should not have temporal power.
I hold that transubstantiation happens once the host is consumed, not before, and not after.
And a handful of other things.

You can hold as much as you wanted, but Jesus has given the responsibilities to the church to do this.

 

[Randy_Carson]

First of all, I am a man.

Not that that’s exceptionally relevant, but there you go.

And no, there is probably nothing anymore that could be shown to me, unless it is clearly from Scripture, to cause me to abandon ABC.

But that is not why I am leaving the Roman Church. I am leaving it because there are a number of teachings given by the ordinary magisterium that I refuse to accept (ABC is not one of them).

I hold that some women can and should be priests.
I hold that people can take the Eucharist, and should, at protestant churches.
Roman Church’s communion should be open to all those who profess Christ as Lord and believe themselves in God’s grace. This includes many Lutherans, many Anglicans, and many other Protestants.
I hold that protestants are just as Christian as those of the Roman Church.
I hold that burning heretics is always wrong.
I hold that the Church should not have temporal power.
I hold that transubstantiation happens once the host is consumed, not before, and not after.
And a handful of other things.

Well, that is a lot of ground to cover. Let’s begin at the beginning.

The first issue that I see is that you appear to be a “sola scriptura” person for you wrote “unless it is clearly from Scripture”. Therefore, what I really ought to do is to demonstate to you that the Authority of the Church is from Jesus (not the Bible), and that the Church wrote, canonized and interprets the Bible. From there, I could illustrate how we look to the Church - and not JUST the Bible - for accurate teaching.

That said, there is a scriptural basis for teaching against ABC. Consider this:

“Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so he put him to death also.” (Genesis 38:8-10)
Onan had sex with his brother’s wife, but he did not complete the act within her; instead, he spilled his seed on the ground to avoid conception. That is obviously one way to avoid pregnancy, but today we have the technology to create many other artificial means to accomplish the same thing. The end is the same, and all these means are offensive to God.

If you do a Google search on the subject, you will learn that all Protestant denominations taught that ABC was a sin prior to 1930. Today, the Catholic Church stands alone in proclaiming this unpopular doctrine. However, issues of right and wrong are not open to ratification by a show of hands.

As for the reception of the Eucharist by Catholics in Protestant Churches and vice versa, I’m sure you’re aware that most Protestants do not believe in the Real Presence of Christ - body, blood, soul and divinity - in the Eucharist. Consubstantiation is similar to Transubstantiation but not the same. Therefore, they cannot receive our Eucharist because they receive it without recognizing the body and blood of our Lord. Paul wrote:

“27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)

Since the Church cannot contradict scripture, I think you can safely take this issue off your list of doctrinal objections.

We, in turn, refrain from participating in their “symbolic” communion because to do so implies a unity that, sadly, does not exist since the time of the Reformation. This same issue of unity applies to those Protestants who do believe in the Real Presence.

The Church does recognize that our separated brethren are worthy of the name of Christian. Paragraph 818 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church reads in part:

"All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

Clearly, you can remove this complaint from your list.

I agree that burning heretics is wrong. We don’t do that any more, so I think you can take that off your list of grievances.

Finally, the Vatican is the smallest of all states, and it has little if any temporal power. Ironically, it was granted statehood as a protection from those who sought power over it. Again, I think this is an objection that has little weight.

That just leaves two open items: ordination of women and transubstantiation. Big topics and more than I want to tackle tonight, but I think you have enough to consider already.

 

[FCEGM]

. . .

I think it is taught in Scripture “For the ways of the Lord are unknowable…”

Then you are essentially an agnostic in Christian clothing, dismissing the Self-Revelation of God in and through the Incarnation of the Son. His Self-revelation for our salvation is there for us to know, but only to the extent that we are in union with His Body, the Catholic Church, which is the extension of His Incarnation in time and place. In separating yourself from His Church, you are left to your own devices to determine what is or isn’t according to His will, and thus tend away from His will as you tend away from His Church. You have put yourself into the role of final arbiter of the Truth, and Truth devolves into the “truth” of whatever fits your own predilections. “God’s will”, then, becomes an excuse for your own. Unless you die to self, you can not live to God.