Did the church lose its authority as Protestants claim? How do we answer that?

[johnnyc176]

They will say that the Church did not ultimately fail, because the Protestants saved it. Hence Jesus was not in error.

Ok so in your op you said…

Many main line Protestants have no issue with saying that the Catholic church was the church founded by Jesus, and that the bible was defined by the Catholic faith, and that the Church had authority to interpret scriptures etc, but that this was somehow lost through corruption. Then the Protestants re-claimed the original church authority, etc. by making the church back to what it was supposed to be.

The Catholic Church compiled the canon of Scripture definitively by end of the 4th century and these people you speak of also submit to the authority of the Catholic Church in interpretation of Scripture, correct? So the corruption, in their mind, must have happened after that. Do they believe in the Sacraments Jesus instituted? The necessity of Baptism? Belief in the Real Presence? Priesthood?

For that matter if they believe the Catholic Church defined the canon of Scripture then they must be reading Catholic Bibles with the books of Wisdom, Baruch, etc.

 

[TxGodfollower]

That’s right, you have it. Their argument is that the ‘hell-proof’ church is NOT the Catholic church. The Catholic church lost it. It is a very simple argument really. And they claim it can be proved historically since the abuses of the Catholic Church can be proved histrionically with testimony.

The problem though is that it would seem that even though corrupt, the church is still the church. This judgement that since they are corrupt means they cannot be the original church anymore seems to be unfounded. The Authority seems to be given, not deserved. The authority is anointed, not earned.

Perhaps that is another thread altogether.

I think a better discussion would be on proving that the succession of popes is correct. The early popes appointed their own successes, so it would make sense that those were perfect choices, since Peter was given a unique promise. But, later popes were chosen by outsiders and now it is done by cardinal election. That would be an interesting discussion, me thinks…

 

[clem456]

Did the church lose its authority as Protestants claim? How do we answer that?

You say, “Is Christ still dead ???”

 

[ericc]

Many main line Protestants have no issue with saying that the Catholic church was the church founded by Jesus, and that the bible was defined by the Catholic faith, and that the Church had authority to interpret scriptures etc, but that this was somehow lost through corruption. Then the Protestants re-claimed the original church authority, etc. by making the church back to what it was supposed to be.

I know many Protestants who sincerely feel this way.

So none of the arguments about how the Catholic church was the one true church, wrote/compiled the biblle, etc., works because they just agree, but then say that this was lost through corruption.

I would appreciate any good way to answer this, that will be accepted by them, for the next time I see some of these folks.

In particular, some of these folks are Baptist, some are Methodist. I also know some LDS who make this point.

One other thing, they all claim to be united on this point. Sometimes it just feels anti-Catholic for the sake of being anti-Catholic.

But I would love a good answer to have if there is one. Something to help with their stumbling block.

You have made several important statements:

1. The Church had the authority
2. The Church lost the authority
3. The loss of authority was caused by corruption

Point 1 is important. There are many Protestants who wouldn’t concede this.

Point 2. No one can take away the authority unless it is done by the authority-giver, which in this case is Jesus himself, or by someone authorized by Jesus. Jesus did not appoint any new authorizer to “supervise” his Church. He appointed only 1 person , Peter, and his successors to lead his Church. Some do a good job, some very bad. One can not claim authority by self-proclamation. Which one of the Reformer Fathers were given that divine-authority? None. Does a bad employee represents the whole Company? That’s silly. Are there sinless people leading the reformed churches? Even more sillier. On this point it is certain that the authority was never taken away by Christ. To rebut this point, one must provide evidence, not just marketing slogans. Saying 30,000 times the Catholic Church lost its authority does not make it so.

Point3. What kind of corruption? Immoral people in the Church? Sure there is. Did these immoral people taught immoral doctrines? Nope. They are just bad examples. For you to make this stick, you need to provide what, when, by whom, where this corruption took place. You can not find it, period.

If they can find evidence for Point 2 and 3, then I guess there is a case for discussion. If they couldn’t, then refer to Point 1.

 

[glendab]

Why not just ask if they can point to a time when Christ Himself came back from Heaven and took back the original authority He gave His Church and her leaders at her inception and gave it to someone else. If it was a Scripturally documented event to establish the Church and load her leaders up with the proper authority to carry out the works God had in mind so those person who were dependent on those men at that time, would acknowledge their authority to direction their spiritual worship and practice, then to revoke all that and start over would have to be an equally historically significant event and would require God doing so in person as He did the first time. So when did Jesus do this?

Truth is He didn’t.

Glenda

 

[Frankenfurter]

I have read all your wonderful replies so far. And Thank You Randy for the very clear arguments. That all helps.

What I see is this all boils down to 2 possible ways of helping these folks get over their barrier. The arguments seem to go in these 2 ways.

1. The church cannot lose its authority unless God himself takes it away, and there is no proof that this happened.
2. The modern church is the same as the church before the so-called loss of authority happened (1500 a.d.) so we do not accept that anything changed which would have caused this loss in authority.

I am going to stick with (2). The problem with (1) is that it implies that no matter how corrupt the church got, or is perceived to have gotten, or gets, that it has an authority that we must bow down to until we hear directly from God otherwise. That will not go over well.

 

[clem456]

1. The modern church is the same as the church before the so-called loss of authority happened (1500 a.d.) so we do not accept that anything changed which would have caused this loss in authority.

Actually the Church lost it’s authority in 1978 when I left it and regained it in the 90’s when I came back. Oh, wait…

 

[glendab]

Hello Clem.

Actually the Church lost it’s authority in 1978 when I left it and regained it in the 90’s when I came back. Oh, wait…

Actually, you’ve pretty much got it right, the whole thread in a nutshell. The acknowledgement of authority in our daily lives makes all the difference in the world and those who have thrown off the gentle yoke of our Savior live their lives as if there is no real authority anywhere. If they refuse to acknowledge the Authority of God and His Church, it seems to not exist at all, but at the end of their lives, then their knees will bow and their tongues confess that Jesus is Lord, only then it will not do them much good at all and in fact, will not bode well for them.

I’m glad you came back. Now don’t go anywhere again!!! Sit home and pray your Rosary like the rest of us sticks in the mud.

Glenda

 

[TxGodfollower]

Hello Clem.

Actually, you’ve pretty much got it right, the whole thread in a nutshell. The acknowledgement of authority in our daily lives makes all the difference in the world and those who have thrown off the gentle yoke of our Savior live their lives as if there is no real authority anywhere. If they refuse to acknowledge the Authority of God and His Church, it seems to not exist at all, but at the end of their lives, then their knees will bow and their tongues confess that Jesus is Lord, only then it will not do them much good at all and in fact, will not bode well for them.

I’m glad you came back. Now don’t go anywhere again!!! Sit home and pray your Rosary like the rest of us sticks in the mud.

Glenda

Important to remember that we are going to be judged based not on the Church, but God’s word.

 

[adf417]

Important to remember that we are going to be judged based not on the Church, but God’s word.

I think the two are inseparable.
Colossians 1:18
He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

Peace!!!

 

[Abu]

TxGodfollower #49
Important to remember that we are going to be judged based not on the Church, but God’s word

Trying to evade Christ’s Church is futile as the many thousands of differing sects testify.

As Jesus Himself taught:
“if he refuses to hear even the Church let him be like the heathen and a publican.” (Mt 18:17).

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them” (Mt 7:15, 16).

“Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them.” (Mt 7:19-20).

St. Paul says also, “through the Church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places (Eph 3:10).” The Church teaches even the angels! This is with the authority of Christ!

St John counsels: “We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.” (1 Jn 4:6 ).

 

[glendab]

Hello TxGodfollower.

Important to remember that we are going to be judged based not on the Church, but God’s word.

Actually God’s Word states very clearly that He intended to not only found a specific Church but would preserve it until the end of time. He also states clearly that unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood, you have no life in you. The Word also states that His disciples were sent to Baptize all men and teach them and bless them and reconcile them to Him via the Sacrament of Penance. There are plenty of things you will be judged on regarding His Church when your time comes. Do your best not to fall short in any one category. If you truly believe God’s Word, then you will not cherry pick those few words that you are willing to accept and live by, but rather accept the whole package and do it all as it is written. Then you’ll be doing your best to keep His Word as He said. that those who love Him keep His Word. All of it.

Glenda

 

[Randy_Carson]

Important to remember that we are going to be judged based not on the Church, but God’s word.

What verse(s) would you use to support that idea?

 

[TxGodfollower]

Hello TxGodfollower.

Actually God’s Word states very clearly that He intended to not only found a specific Church but would preserve it until the end of time. He also states clearly that unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood, you have no life in you. The Word also states that His disciples were sent to Baptize all men and teach them and bless them and reconcile them to Him via the Sacrament of Penance. There are plenty of things you will be judged on regarding His Church when your time comes. Do your best not to fall short in any one category. If you truly believe God’s Word, then you will not cherry pick those few words that you are willing to accept and live by, but rather accept the whole package and do it all as it is written. Then you’ll be doing your best to keep His Word as He said. that those who love Him keep His Word. All of it.

Glenda

Glenda, do you think that if your neighbor has trouble with stealing, he should chop off his own hand? Or someone that has trouble with coveting his neighbor’s belongings should gouge out his own eye/eyes? If we really take Christ words seriously in whole, most Christians would be self-mutilated.

What verse(s) would you use to support that idea?

Revelation 20:12 and Romans 2:16 are the first that come to mind.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Revelation 20:12 and Romans 2:16 are the first that come to mind.

Oh. I thought you were trying to make a point about being judged according the Bible. Now I understand.

 

[ericc]

I have read all your wonderful replies so far. And Thank You Randy for the very clear arguments. That all helps.

What I see is this all boils down to 2 possible ways of helping these folks get over their barrier. The arguments seem to go in these 2 ways.

1. The church cannot lose its authority unless God himself takes it away, and there is no proof that this happened.
2. The modern church is the same as the church before the so-called loss of authority happened (1500 a.d.) so we do not accept that anything changed which would have caused this loss in authority.

I am going to stick with (2). The problem with (1) is that it implies that no matter how corrupt the church got, or is perceived to have gotten, or gets, that it has an authority that we must bow down to until we hear directly from God otherwise. That will not go over well.

Don’t you have to prove the Catholic Church guilty of the so-call corruption in the very first place? Or is it just/right/truthful to go round and call her names without having to prove the allegations?

 

[Frankenfurter]

It seems that the church has been convicted of the offense in the court of public approval anyways. So there is no need to argue this point to Protestants.

But the claim that the church is the same now as it was when they ‘had the authority’ seems to be a powerful argument.

I doubt that an argument about how the church never did anything wrong is going to go anywhere. That case has been settled.

Kind of reminds me of how Christ was accused of wrong-doing even though he was innocent and pure.

I guess that is par for the course.

 

[clem456]

It seems that the church has been convicted of the offense in the court of public approval anyways. So there is no need to argue this point to Protestants.

But the claim that the church is the same now as it was when they ‘had the authority’ seems to be a powerful argument.

I doubt that an argument about how the church never did anything wrong is going to go anywhere. That case has been settled.

Kind of reminds me of how Christ was accused of wrong-doing even though he was innocent and pure.

I guess that is par for the course.

All people are sinners, so even Popes have done wrong things. However the Pope cannot teach an article of faith in error, as his authority in faith is not his own, but that of Christ. The pope cannot teach the faith out of communion with the whole body, including Christ. who is it’s head.

The Church is never “the same”, as in stuck in one place spiritually. It is a living organism journeying through time, the life of which is Christ, who gives it motion, life, and being. Church teaching flowers (for those of you who don’t like the word evolve). Revelation is complete, but it is not fully understood in time. Our *understanding of *that which never changes (God) does grow. The Church is “the same” in this respect: it is Christ’s body in eternity, and Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

If you deny the authority of His Body, you deny Christ, plain and simple. You either believe he has a durable community, or you don’t believe he has a community, or you don’t believe his community is durable. Both of those assumptions are problematic.

 

[Abu]

Frankenfurter #57
I doubt that an argument about how the church never did anything wrong is going to go anywhere. That case has been settled.

Settled as follows – the Magisterium has taught irrevocably in Ecumenical Council Vatican II that **the Pope never apologises for the Church which is ‘held, as a matter of faith, to be unfailingly holy’ **Lumen Gentium, art 39].

In *First Things *(November 1997), Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon wrote that “the Pope himself has acknowledged the mistakes and sins of Christians in connection with, among other things, the Crusades, the Inquisition, persecution of the Jews, religious wars, Galileo, and the treatment of women. Thus, though the Pope himself is careful to speak of sin or error on the part of the Church’s members or representatives, rather than the Church in its fullness, that important theological distinction is almost always lost in the transmission.” [My emphasis].

 

[Ignatius]

Many main line Protestants have no issue with saying that the Catholic church was the church founded by Jesus, and that the bible was defined by the Catholic faith, and that the Church had authority to interpret scriptures etc, but that this was somehow lost through corruption.

Interesting, I wasn’t able to find it in the Bible alone. Where does Jesus say “I will not be with you until the end of time and the gates of hell will prevail” against His Church?