Many say it does not say it in the Bible.

[ufamtobie]

Many say well, it does not say that in the Bible. How many of us Catholics have heard this by our Protestant brothers and sisters Re: Transubstantiation, Marian Dogmas, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, Praying the Most Holy Rosary, Purgatory, wearing the Brown Scapular, praying to the Saints, praying for the dead, the word Catholic, etc…etc…etc…

The truth is the Bible does not tell us everything, because Jesus Christ, did not leave the Bible to guide us. Jesus Christ left His Church to guide us by the Power of the Holy Spirit! Amen. Below Jesus Christ said in Matt 16:18

Matt 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Above Jesus Christ states: I will build my Church, not my Bible. So it is the Church that we must adhere to. Don’t get me wrong the Holy Bible is good but it is only this Church that can interpret the Bible. (Hint) The Catholic Church compiled the New Testament, by the Power of the Holy Spirit, So then who’s better by the Power of the Holy Spirit to interpret it.

Matt16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

 The Bible does not have the keys to the Kingdom, therefore the Holy bible does not have this power to bind and loose anything in heaven or on earth, Only the Catholic Church has the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven, to bind and loose anything in heaven or on earth. It is this Church that we must follow and adhere to.

Now, this Catholic Church who has the “Keys” and teaches the truth Re: Transubstantiation, Marian Dogmas, etc…etc… we ALL then must all adhere to it, because no other Church has the Keys to the kingdom and the Gates of hell can not prevail over it.

Let me put it this way: If the Catholic Church says to you, Jump up and down for an hour, then you must jump up and down for an hour, without hesitation, it may sound funny and NO, the Catholic Church will never have you do such a thing as to jump up and down for an hour, only trying to get the point across and that is we all must, must adhere to it. Amen

Only One Church has the Keys to the Kingdom, and we Christians All belong to this one Church. Amen

Ufam Tobie

 

[Link0126]

Exactly. For us the Bible is a product of our faith, something that grew out of the Faith given to us by God and passed on by the Apostles and their successors. To them, their faith is a product of the Bible. They try to use the Bible to discern the Faith from written words almost 2,000 years later. This is why a small group of them cling fervently to one translation (most notably, the KJV only crowd) in order to discern some absolute truth. Many of them spend years going back to the greek documents, to get at the true meaning of each phrase and argue over the interpretation and translations of words.

They reinvent the wheel because they second guess their pastors teaching and even settled Christian doctrine. Ultimately, they have no way to decide whose understanding of the Faith is true. Eventually, if they are honest enough and observant enough they realize this methodology is built on sand.

 

[onemangang]

Depends who your talking to.

Some will say the Trinity is not in the bible
Free will is not in the bible.
Jesus never said He was God in the bible…etc…etc…etc

 

[Rence]

A big part of it is that all these Church rules and laws come from bits in the Bible, and you basically have to trust that the Church leaders got the interpretation right. For example:

Matt 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Some would wonder how that one sentence translates into the Pope and his infallibility, and the extent of power the Church has given the Pope.

Matt16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Some would wonder how that one verse defines the whole Sacrament of Reconciliation and the teachings of it, and the obligation everyone on earth has to confess their sins to a priest. Some people believe that Jesus was talking to Peter and only Peter, not thousands that came after him.

The Church put together the Bible. They took all the writings and decided what was going to be a part of the New Testament and what was not going to be a part of it. If there are other writings that would help people to better understand the Church laws and teachings, other people don’t have as easy access to them to do just that.

 

[PRmerger]

Some would wonder how that one sentence translates into the Pope and his infallibility, and the extent of power the Church has given the Pope.

The Catholic would respond that the infallibility of the pope and the Church does not come from that “one sentence”.

The Infallibility of the Catholic Church Proved from Scripture
Originally Posted by Randy Carson

The following verses suggest that the Catholic Church is protected by God from ever teaching error in matters of faith and morals, and questions concerning each verse are provided as food for thought.

Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

Q: If Jesus promised to build his own church and that Church ever fell into doctrinal error, would this mean that a) Jesus was a liar, b) Jesus did not have the power to protect his own church, or c) Jesus was incompetent as a church builder?

Matthew 18:15-18
If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 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.

Q: If the Church has the authority to bind and loose on earth in a manner that is also true in heaven, then assuming that there is no error in heaven, can the Church err on earth?

Matthew 28:20
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

Q: If the Church fell into doctrinal error at any time during the nearly 1500 years before the Protestant Reformation, did Jesus remain with the Church “always”?

Luke 10:16
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Q: If the Church speaks with such authority that those who hear the Church are actually hearing Christ and such that anyone who rejects the words of the Church are rejecting Christ Himself, can the Church ever be allowed to speak error on behalf of Jesus?

John 14:15-16
15"If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever—

Q: If the Church fell into doctrinal error, would this indicate that Jesus did not give the Counselor or that the Counselor simply failed to remain with the Church “forever”?

John 14:18
18I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.

Q: If the Church ever fell into doctrinal error, did Jesus actually leave us as “orphans” during all that time?

John 14:26
26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Q: Despite this promise, did the Holy Spirit fail to teach the Church “all things” or to remind the Church of the things that Jesus had said to the Apostles?

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Q: Did the Holy Spirit fail to guide the Church into all truth?

Now, consider the following three verses:

1 John 4:4
4You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.

1 Timothy 3:13
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

Mark 3:27
27In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house.

Q: Is Satan stronger than Jesus, is the Church the household of God, and can Satan rob the Church of the deposit of truth by “binding” Jesus in any way?

In light of the above, is it possible that the Church fell into doctrinal error? Taken individually, each of these verses creates a problem for those that assert that the Church “went off the rails” at some point in history. Taken as a whole, they portray Christ’s own involvement in building, nurturing and protecting His Church until the end of time. The Catholic Church remains strong and vibrant – not by her own efforts or innate qualities – but because God Himself is leading and guiding her to ensure that “the gates of hell will not overcome it.”

 

[PRmerger]

Some would wonder how that one verse defines the whole Sacrament of Reconciliation and the teachings of it, and the obligation everyone on earth has to confess their sins to a priest. Some people believe that Jesus was talking to Peter and only Peter, not thousands that came after him.

The Catholic would now respond, “How curious that there are some who are so unfamiliar with Catholic teaching that they would proffer that it’s ‘one verse’ that supports the Catholic Church’s teaching on _____”

Scriptural support of the Catholic sacrament of Reconciliation:

John 20:21 - before He grants them the authority to forgive sins, Jesus says to the apostles, “as the Father sent me, so I send you.” As Christ was sent by the Father to forgive sins, so Christ sends the apostles and their successors forgive sins.

John 20:22 - the Lord “breathes” on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. The only other moment in Scripture where God breathes on man is in Gen. 2:7, when the Lord “breathes” divine life into man. When this happens, a significant transformation takes place.

John 20:23 - Jesus says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” In order for the apostles to exercise this gift of forgiving sins, the penitents must orally confess their sins to them because the apostles are not mind readers. The text makes this very clear.

Matt. 9:8 - this verse shows that God has given the authority to forgive sins to “men.” Hence, those Protestants who acknowledge that the apostles had the authority to forgive sins (which this verse demonstrates) must prove that this gift ended with the apostles. Otherwise, the apostles’ successors still possess this gift. Where in Scripture is the gift of authority to forgive sins taken away from the apostles or their successors?

Matt. 9:6; Mark 2:10 - Christ forgave sins as a man (not God) to convince us that the “Son of man” has authority to forgive sins on earth.

Luke 5:24 - Luke also points out that Jesus’ authority to forgive sins is as a man, not God. The Gospel writers record this to convince us that God has given this authority to men. This authority has been transferred from Christ to the apostles and their successors.

Matt. 18:18 - the apostles are given authority to bind and loose. The authority to bind and loose includes administering and removing the temporal penalties due to sin. The Jews understood this since the birth of the Church.

John 20:22-23; Matt. 18:18 - the power to remit/retain sin is also the power to remit/retain punishment due to sin. If Christ’s ministers can forgive the eternal penalty of sin, they can certainly remit the temporal penalty of sin (which is called an “indulgence”).

2 Cor. 2:10 - Paul forgives in the presence of Christ (some translations refer to the presences of Christ as “in persona Christi”). Some say that this may also be a reference to sins.

2 Cor. 5:18 - the ministry of reconciliation was given to the ambassadors of the Church. This ministry of reconciliation refers to the sacrament of reconciliation, also called the sacrament of confession or penance.

James 5:15-16 - in verse 15 we see that sins are forgiven by the priests in the sacrament of the sick. This is another example of man’s authority to forgive sins on earth. Then in verse 16, James says “Therefore, confess our sins to one another,” in reference to the men referred to in verse 15, the priests of the Church.

1 Tim. 2:5 - Christ is the only mediator, but He was free to decide how His mediation would be applied to us. The Lord chose to use priests of God to carry out His work of forgiveness.

Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22 - even under the Old Covenant, God used priests to forgive and atone for the sins of others. source

 

[Rence]

The Catholic would respond that the infallibility of the pope and the Church does not come from that “one sentence”.

The Infallibility of the Catholic Church Proved from Scripture
Originally Posted by Randy Carson

The following verses suggest that the Catholic Church is protected by God from ever teaching error in matters of faith and morals, and questions concerning each verse are provided as food for thought.

Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

Q: If Jesus promised to build his own church and that Church ever fell into doctrinal error, would this mean that a) Jesus was a liar, b) Jesus did not have the power to protect his own church, or c) Jesus was incompetent as a church builder?

Some might say that 'the gates of Hades will not overcome it" pertains to the destruction of the Church, or to the war between God and the devil. Some may believe the above doesn’t pertain to the Church ever falling into doctrinal error. So, no Jesus wouldn’t be a liar, or not have the power to protect His Church (against what is debatable depending on who reads the verse), and of course Jesus was a competent Church builder Remember most people who have problems with Scriptures have a problem with the human capacity to interpret or find meaning in them, not with Jesus. In other words, they would have to trust the Church, and of course we know non-Catholics don’t.

Matthew 18:15-18
If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 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.

Q: If the Church has the authority to bind and loose on earth in a manner that is also true in heaven, then assuming that there is no error in heaven, can the Church err on earth?

Some would argue that the verse above is about going to the whole group, because they lived together as a community, and all of them together were able to influence a lone person in the group. The community was very cohesive. It’s worth pointing out that this is not so today. Today the Church can’t protect the victim of disputes. One can’t go to the Church and get resolution to disputes. One can’t even go to their parish as a group the way the small communities did in the past. As to the last sentence, some would argue that he meant those particular disciples had the power to loose and bind, not a whole line of them through 2000+ years. And some would add that of course the Church can err on earth, because nothing about those verses makes the men who run the Church not human. And humans err.

Matthew 28:20
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

But all non-Catholic religions believe God will be with them to the very end of the age. So this isn’t exclusive to Catholicism. And surely, “where two or more are gathered, I am there” comes to mind to many non-Catholics.

Luke 10:16
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Q: If the Church speaks with such authority that those who hear the Church are actually hearing Christ and such that anyone who rejects the words of the Church are rejecting Christ Himself, can the Church ever be allowed to speak error on behalf of Jesus?

Well, this one is hard for me to talk about with non-Catholics because some would say that Jesus was specifically talking about Peter and the Apostles and first disciples. Unlike bloodlines which are passed along, and can be proven, one can’t prove apolostic succession. Anyone could have said he was part of the group and went off to do his own thing thereby falling into error along the way and passing it on.

And even if that didnt’ happen, which we would have no way of proving (so again, we’re talking about trust here) one would argue that acceptance doesn’t mean one has to believe and accept every single thing that the teachers said. By not accepting one thing or another, one (it is argued) is not rejecting Christ Himself.

John 14:15-16
15"If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever—

Q: If the Church fell into doctrinal error, would this indicate that Jesus did not give the Counselor or that the Counselor simply failed to remain with the Church “forever”?

But a non-Catholic believes they do have a counselor, it’s just not the Pope…if one believes the Church became corrupt along the way, and followed a different leader, that is their Counselor. I dont’ know how to aruge with that…because that person would have to trust the Church, which clearly they don’t.

Remember, Jesus was accessible to the masses, even when the Apostles tried to bar them. Not so today. Today we can’t call the Pope and ask him questions and get his counsel. So it’s not difficult to understand outsiders seeing the Pope as the figurehead of a very large religion as opposed to a “The Counselor”. They, on the other hand, go to their pastors and other religious leaders. They are not without a counselor either, and they believe God put him there.

 

[Rence]

John 14:18
18I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.

Q: If the Church ever fell into doctrinal error, did Jesus actually leave us as “orphans” during all that time?

John 14:26
26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Q: Despite this promise, did the Holy Spirit fail to teach the Church “all things” or to remind the Church of the things that Jesus had said to the Apostles?

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Q: Did the Holy Spirit fail to guide the Church into all truth?

Again, many non-Catholics are touched by Jesus, have a leader/counselor, and feel that the promises are fulfilled through their own religion, so no one practicing a non-Catholic religions in earnest is left an orphan so I can’t argue that one with them. That still doesn’t make them believe the Catholic Church is in error any less. In fact, some are quote vocal about Catholics being evil and cultist. So to them, no it does not say that specifically in the Bible, but those verses apply to them as well.

Now, consider the following three verses:

1 John 4:4
4You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.

1 Timothy 3:13
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

Mark 3:27
27In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house.

Q: Is Satan stronger than Jesus, is the Church the household of God, and can Satan rob the Church of the deposit of truth by “binding” Jesus in any way?

No, Satan isn’t stronger than Jesus, but God gave man free will and they can use it to do good or evil. And just like with anything else, priests, other religious, and even past popes have done bad things for the world to see. Not only that, in the case of simple error, someone in error is not in error because they think they are wrong, but because they think they are right. So if one person is in error, the next person can just as well be in error too by virtue of the fact that we are all human and bound to be in error. Non-Catholics trust Jesus and His Words, and heed them even when Jesus said to beware of imposters and false teachers.

Also, consider the words above of knowing how one is to conduct themselves. Some non-Catholics are so very devout and so very touched by Jesus in their lives. While Catholics are so very divided despite being “one” and don’t live in communion with the Church yet still say they are Catholic. Yes, we can argue that the heirarchy is all one, even if the members are divided and as Catholics we can say that doesn’t matter. But that still makes a divided house both to those living outside of it as well as those in it. The Church (not the heirarchy in Rome) is just as divided within itself as there are Christian sects.

In light of the above, is it possible that the Church fell into doctrinal error? Taken individually, each of these verses creates a problem for those that assert that the Church “went off the rails” at some point in history. Taken as a whole, they portray Christ’s own involvement in building, nurturing and protecting His Church until the end of time. The Catholic Church remains strong and vibrant – not by her own efforts or innate qualities – but because God Himself is leading and guiding her to ensure that “the gates of hell will not overcome it.”

I think taking it as a whole just makes things worse actually because I always get the, “that’s not what that means, you’re misinterpreting it to make it something much bigger than it was intended”. I don’t even attempt to debate these things with non-Catholics anymore because to them it sounds like it was formulated to mold the Church’s teachings. Every single one of those verses can be answered with a different meaning than one the Church teaches, and can be done when taken together.

What it boils down to is faith and trust. If one doesn’t have faith in the Church, and trust the Church, then they will interpret those readings differently. Even Catholics interpret some or all of those readings differently. So it’s hard to debate them.

 

[Rence]

The Catholic would now respond, “How curious that there are some who are so unfamiliar with Catholic teaching that they would proffer that it’s ‘one verse’ that supports the Catholic Church’s teaching on _____”

Scriptural support of the Catholic sacrament of Reconciliation:

John 20:21 - before He grants them the authority to forgive sins, Jesus says to the apostles, “as the Father sent me, so I send you.” As Christ was sent by the Father to forgive sins, so Christ sends the apostles and their successors forgive sins.

So where do the successors fit in? How do I prove that Jesus told them to pass it along to others and have sucessors to those who were in the room at the time? How would we know them? Just by their word?

John 20:22 - the Lord “breathes” on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. The only other moment in Scripture where God breathes on man is in Gen. 2:7, when the Lord “breathes” divine life into man. When this happens, a significant transformation takes place.

Yeah, He made Man.

John 20:23 - Jesus says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” In order for the apostles to exercise this gift of forgiving sins, the penitents must orally confess their sins to them because the apostles are not mind readers. The text makes this very clear.

Not to those who don’t have the Sacrament of Reconciliation. This text does not make it clear that you have to confess sins because in those days the sins under scrutiny were publicly known and confessors were brought to the group.

Matt. 9:8 - this verse shows that God has given the authority to forgive sins to “men.” Hence, those Protestants who acknowledge that the apostles had the authority to forgive sins (which this verse demonstrates) must prove that this gift ended with the apostles. Otherwise, the apostles’ successors still possess this gift. Where in Scripture is the gift of authority to forgive sins taken away from the apostles or their successors?

Where was it given though? Where does it say that the apostles will have successors that can forgive sins in God’s stead?

Matt. 9:6; Mark 2:10 - Christ forgave sins as a man (not God) to convince us that the “Son of man” has authority to forgive sins on earth.

Right, the “Son of man” has authroity to forgiven sins on earth.

Luke 5:24 - Luke also points out that Jesus’ authority to forgive sins is as a man, not God. The Gospel writers record this to convince us that God has given this authority to men. This authority has been transferred from Christ to the apostles and their successors.

But Jesus is God. That’s part of our teachings. Jesus is God and man. So it’s not convincing to those who know God is both man and God that God gave the authority to men or that he should have successors. That’s something we, as Catholics, entrust to the Church. It’s one of the mysteries of our faith.

Matt. 18:18 - the apostles are given authority to bind and loose. The authority to bind and loose includes administering and removing the temporal penalties due to sin. The Jews understood this since the birth of the Church.

But the Church doesn’t have that power anymore. Non-Catholics know this. The Church can’t intervene when Catholics have disputes. They used to when they lived as a small and influential community, not so anymore. So this didn’t have any longevity that makes a non-Catholic believe in the requirment of confessing sins.

John 20:22-23; Matt. 18:18 - the power to remit/retain sin is also the power to remit/retain punishment due to sin. If Christ’s ministers can forgive the eternal penalty of sin, they can certainly remit the temporal penalty of sin (which is called an “indulgence”).

Indulgences - I don’t even want to get into those with non-Catholics. I have enough trouble with Confession.

2 Cor. 2:10 - Paul forgives in the presence of Christ (some translations refer to the presences of Christ as “in persona Christi”). Some say that this may also be a reference to sins.

But some say not…

2 Cor. 5:18 - the ministry of reconciliation was given to the ambassadors of the Church. This ministry of reconciliation refers to the sacrament of reconciliation, also called the sacrament of confession or penance.

James 5:15-16 - in verse 15 we see that sins are forgiven by the priests in the sacrament of the sick. This is another example of man’s authority to forgive sins on earth. Then in verse 16, James says “Therefore, confess our sins to one another,” in reference to the men referred to in verse 15, the priests of the Church.

Confessing sins to one another makes sense because the offended party has the authority to forgive someone who wrongs him/her. The ministry of reconcilation is still not proven to non-Catholics.

1 Tim. 2:5 - Christ is the only mediator, but He was free to decide how His mediation would be applied to us. The Lord chose to use priests of God to carry out His work of forgiveness.

Yes, and he chose his priests. But where is the proof of succession?

Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22 - even under the Old Covenant, God used priests to forgive and atone for the sins of others. source

That’s not the same as the Sacrament of Reconciliation as taught by the Church…

 

[PRmerger]

Some might say that 'the gates of Hades will not overcome it" pertains to the destruction of the Church, or to the war between God and the devil. Some may believe the above doesn’t pertain to the Church ever falling into doctrinal error. So, no Jesus wouldn’t be a liar, or not have the power to protect His Church (against what is debatable depending on who reads the verse), and of course Jesus was a competent Church builder Remember most people who have problems with Scriptures have a problem with the human capacity to interpret or find meaning in them, not with Jesus. In other words, they would have to trust the Church, and of course we know non-Catholics don’t.

Well, they say that they don’t “trust” the Church, yet they seem to have no problem trusting that the Church got it right in discerning the canon of Scripture for them.

Some would argue that the verse above is about going to the whole group, because they lived together as a community, and all of them together were able to influence a lone person in the group. The community was very cohesive. It’s worth pointing out that this is not so today. Today the Church can’t protect the victim of disputes. One can’t go to the Church and get resolution to disputes. One can’t even go to their parish as a group the way the small communities did in the past. As to the last sentence, some would argue that he meant those particular disciples had the power to loose and bind, not a whole line of them through 2000+ years. And some would add that of course the Church can err on earth, because nothing about those verses makes the men who run the Church not human. And humans err.

And the Catholic would respond, in a similar vein to my previous point, “How is it that you believe the Church can err, but that she did not err in discerning the canon of Scripture?”

But all non-Catholic religions believe God will be with them to the very end of the age. So this isn’t exclusive to Catholicism. And surely, “where two or more are gathered, I am there” comes to mind to many non-Catholics.

Indeed.

It’s a non-sequitur, but true indeed.

(I don’t believe any Catholic here has proclaimed that God being with them is “exclusive to Catholicism”)

Well, this one is hard for me to talk about with non-Catholics because some would say that Jesus was specifically talking about Peter and the Apostles and first disciples. Unlike bloodlines which are passed along, and can be proven, one can’t prove apolostic succession. Anyone could have said he was part of the group and went off to do his own thing thereby falling into error along the way and passing it on.

Best to ask what verse supports the paradigm that the Holy Spirit abandoned His Church.

And even if that didnt’ happen, which we would have no way of proving (so again, we’re talking about trust here) one would argue that acceptance doesn’t mean one has to believe and accept every single thing that the teachers said. By not accepting one thing or another, one (it is argued) is not rejecting Christ Himself.

What canon, then, does this non-Catholic Christian use to discern whether she accepts the teaching or not?

Should one be conforming one’s views to Christ’s, or should one be finding a church that conforms to one’s own views?

But a non-Catholic believes they do have a counselor, it’s just not the Pope…if one believes the Church became corrupt along the way, and followed a different leader, that is their Counselor. I dont’ know how to aruge with that…because that person would have to trust the Church, which clearly they don’t.

Again, it’s curious that the trust the Church enough to believe our NT discernment, but then to say that they don’t trust the Catholic Church–odd!

Remember, Jesus was accessible to the masses, even when the Apostles tried to bar them. Not so today. Today we can’t call the Pope and ask him questions and get his counsel. So it’s not difficult to understand outsiders seeing the Pope as the figurehead of a very large religion as opposed to a “The Counselor”. They, on the other hand, go to their pastors and other religious leaders. They are not without a counselor either, and they believe God put him there.

No, not without a counselor. But truly without a Counselor.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, and he chose his priests. But where is the proof of succession?

I always say, “Where in the Scriptures does it say that the Holy Spirit anointed only first century Christians?”

I’ve never gotten a chapter or verse that answers my question.

 

[PRmerger]

Unlike bloodlines which are passed along, and can be proven, one can’t prove apolostic succession.

Ordained Leaders Share in Jesus’ Ministry and Authority

Matt. 10:1,40 - Jesus declares to His apostles, “he who receives you, receives Me, and he who rejects you, rejects Me and the One who sent Me.” Jesus freely gives His authority to the apostles in order for them to effectively convert the world.

Matt. 16:19; 18:18 - the apostles are given Christ’s authority to make visible decisions on earth that will be ratified in heaven. God raises up humanity in Christ by exalting his chosen leaders and endowing them with the authority and grace they need to bring about the conversion of all. Without a central authority in the Church, there would be chaos (as there is in Protestantism).

Luke 9:1; 10:19 - Jesus gives the apostles authority over the natural and the supernatural (diseases, demons, serpents, and scorpions).

Luke 10:16 - Jesus tells His apostles, “he who hears you, hears Me.” When we hear the bishops’ teaching on the faith, we hear Christ Himself.

Luke 22:29 - the Father gives the kingdom to the Son, and the Son gives the kingdom to the apostles. The gift is transferred from the Father to the Son to the apostles.

Num 16:28 - the Father’s authority is transferred to Moses. Moses does not speak on his own. This is a real transfer of authority.

John 5:30 - similarly, Jesus as man does nothing of His own authority, but He acts under the authority of the Father.

John 7:16-17 - Jesus as man states that His authority is not His own, but from God. He will transfer this authority to other men.

John 8:28 - Jesus says He does nothing on His own authority. Similarly, the apostles will do nothing on their own authority. Their authority comes from God.

John 12:49 - The father’s authority is transferred to the Son. The Son does not speak on his own. This is a transfer of divine authority.

John 13:20 - Jesus says, “he who receives anyone who I send, receives Me.” He who receives the apostles, receives Christ Himself. He who rejects the apostles and their successors, rejects Christ.

John 14:10 - Jesus says the Word He speaks is not His own authority, but from the Father. The gift is from the Father to Jesus to the apostles.

John 16:14-15 - what the Father has, the Son has, and the Son gives it to the apostles. The authority is not lessened or mitigated.

John 17:18; 20:21 - as the Father sends the Son, the Son sends the apostles. The apostles have divinely appointed authority.

Acts 20:28 - the apostles are shepherds and guardians appointed by the Holy Spirit / 1 Peter 2:25 - Jesus is the Shepherd and Guardian. The apostles, by the power of the Spirit, share Christ’s ministry and authority.

Jer. 23:1-8; Ezek. 34:1-10 - the shepherds must shepherd the sheep, or they will be held accountable by God.

Eph. 2:20 - the Christian faith is built upon the foundation of the apostles. The word “foundation” proves that it does not die with apostles, but carries on through succession.

Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:9,14 - the words “household,” “Bride of the Lamb,” the “new Jerusalem” are all metaphors for the Church whose foundation is the apostles.

cont’d

 

[PRmerger]

Authority is Transferred by the Sacrament of Ordination

Acts 1:15-26 - the first thing Peter does after Jesus ascends into heaven is implement apostolic succession. Matthias is ordained with full apostolic authority. Only the Catholic Church can demonstrate an unbroken apostolic lineage to the apostles in union with Peter through the sacrament of ordination and thereby claim to teach with Christ’s own authority.

Acts 1:20 - a successor of Judas is chosen. The authority of his office (his “bishopric”) is respected notwithstanding his egregious sin. The necessity to have apostolic succession in order for the Church to survive was understood by all. God never said, “I’ll give you leaders with authority for about 400 years, but after the Bible is compiled, you are all on your own.”

Acts 1:22 - literally, “one must be ordained” to be a witness with us of His resurrection. Apostolic ordination is required in order to teach with Christ’s authority.

Acts 6:6 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority has transferred beyond the original twelve apostles as the Church has grown.

Acts 9:17-19 - even Paul, who was directly chosen by Christ, only becomes a minister after the laying on of hands by a bishop. This is a powerful proof-text for the necessity of sacramental ordination in order to be a legitimate successor of the apostles.

Acts 13:3 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority must come from a Catholic bishop.

Acts 14:23 - the apostles and newly-ordained men appointed elders to have authority throughout the Church.

Acts 15:22-27 - preachers of the Word must be sent by the bishops in union with the Church. We must trace this authority to the apostles.

2 Cor. 1:21-22 - Paul writes that God has commissioned certain men and sealed them with the Holy Spirit as a guarantee.

Col 1:25 - Paul calls his position a divine “office.” An office has successors. It does not terminate at death. Or it’s not an office. See also Heb. 7:23 – an office continues with another successor after the previous office-holder’s death.

1 Tim. 3:1 - Paul uses the word “episcopoi” (bishop) which requires an office. Everyone understood that Paul’s use of episcopoi and office meant it would carry on after his death by those who would succeed him.

1 Tim. 4:14 - again, apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination).

1 Tim. 5:22 - Paul urges Timothy to be careful in laying on the hands (ordaining others). The gift of authority is a reality and cannot be used indiscriminately.

2 Tim. 1:6 - Paul again reminds Timothy the unique gift of God that he received through the laying on of hands.

2 Tim. 4:1-6 - at end of Paul’s life, Paul charges Timothy with the office of his ministry . We must trace true apostolic lineage back to a Catholic bishop.

2 Tim. 2:2 - this verse shows God’s intention is to transfer authority to successors (here, Paul to Timothy to 3rd to 4th generation). It goes beyond the death of the apostles.

Titus 1:5; Luke 10:1 - the elders of the Church are appointed and hold authority. God has His children participate in Christ’s work.

1 John 4:6 - whoever knows God listens to us (the bishops and the successors to the apostles). This is the way we discern truth and error (not just by reading the Bible and interpreting it for ourselves).

Exodus 18:25-26 - Moses appoints various heads over the people of God. We see a hierarchy, a transfer of authority and succession.

Exodus 40:15 - the physical anointing shows that God intended a perpetual priesthood with an identifiable unbroken succession.

Numbers 3:3 - the sons of Aaron were formally “anointed” priests in “ordination” to minister in the priests’ “office.”

Numbers 16:40 - shows God’s intention of unbroken succession within His kingdom on earth. Unless a priest was ordained by Aaron and his descendants, he had no authority.

Numbers 27:18-20 - shows God’s intention that, through the “laying on of hands,” one is commissioned and has authority.

Deut. 34:9 - Moses laid hands upon Joshua, and because of this, Joshua was obeyed as successor, full of the spirit of wisdom.

Sirach 45:15 - Moses ordains Aaron and anoints him with oil. There is a transfer of authority through formal ordination

cont’d

 

[PRmerger]

cont’d

Jesus Wants Us to Obey Apostolic Authority

Acts 5:13 - the people acknowledged the apostles’ special authority and did not dare take it upon themselves.

Acts 15:6,24; 16:4 - the teaching authority is granted to the apostles and their successors. This teaching authority must be traced to the original apostles, or the authority is not sanctioned by Christ.

Rom. 15:16 – Paul says he is a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable. This refers to the ministerial priesthood of the ordained which is distinguishable from the universal priesthood of the laity. Notice the Gentiles are the “sacrifice” and Paul does the “offering.”

1 Cor. 5:3-5; 16:22; 1 Tim. 1:20; Gal 1:8; Matt 18:17 – these verses show the authority of the elders to excommunicate / anathemize (“deliver to satan”).

2 Cor. 2:17 - Paul says the elders are not just random peddlers of God’s word. They are actually commissioned by God. It is not self-appointed authority.

2 Cor. 3:6 – Paul says that certain men have been qualified by God to be ministers of a New Covenant. This refers to the ministerial priesthood of Christ handed down the ages through sacramental ordination.

2 Cor. 5:20 - Paul says we are “ambassadors” for Christ. This means that the apostles and their successors share an actual participation in Christ’s mission, which includes healing, forgiving sins, and confecting the sacraments.

2 Cor. 10:6 – in reference to the ordained, Paul says that they are ready to punish every disobedience. The Church has the authority excommunicate those who disobey her.

2 Cor. 10:8 - Paul acknowledges his authority over God’s people which the Lord gave to build up the Church.

1 Thess. 5:12-13 - Paul charges the members of the Church to respect those who have authority over them.

2 Thess. 3:14 - Paul says if a person does not obey what he has provided in his letter, have nothing to do with him.

1 Tim. 5:17 - Paul charges the members of the Church to honor the appointed elders (“priests”) of the Church.

Titus 2:15 - Paul charges Timothy to exhort and reprove with all authority, which he received by the laying on of hands.

Heb. 12:9 – in the context of spiritual discipline, the author says we have had earthly fathers (referring to the ordained leaders) to discipline us and we respected them.

Heb. 13:7,17 - Paul charges the members of the Church to remember and obey their leaders who have authority over their souls.

1 Peter 2:18 - Peter charges the servants to be submissive to their masters whether kind and gentle or overbearing.

1 Peter 5:5; Jude 8 - Peter and Jude charge the members of the Church to be subject to their elders.

2 Peter 2:10 - Peter warns the faithful about despising authority. He is referring to the apostolic authority granted to them by Christ.

3 John 9 - John points out that Diotrephes does not acknowledge John’s apostolic authority and declares that this is evil.

Deut. 17:10-13 - the Lord commands His faithful Israel to obey the priests that He puts in charge, and do to all that they direct and instruct. The Lord warns that those who do not obey His priests shall die.

Num. 16:1-35 - Korah incited a “protestant” rebellion against God’s chosen Moses in an effort to confuse the distinction between the ministerial and universal offices of priesthood, and Korah and his followers perished. (This effort to blind the distinctions between the priests and the laity is still pursued by dissidents today.)

Sirach 7:29-30 - with all your soul fear the Lord and honor His priests, love your Maker and do not forsake His ministers. God is not threatened by the authority He gives His children! God, as our Loving Father, invites us to participate in His plan of salvation with His Son Jesus. Without authority in the Church, there is error, chaos and confusion. source

And don’t even get me started on the ECFS and the citations that support apostolic succession from them! To those non-Catholic Christians who find the ECFs persuasive (and there are some!), these are killer citations.

 

[Rence]

Well, they say that they don’t “trust” the Church, yet they seem to have no problem trusting that the Church got it right in discerning the canon of Scripture for them.

That’s because it’s all they have. All the documents are in the custody of the Catholic Church.

And the Catholic would respond, in a similar vein to my previous point, “How is it that you believe the Church can err, but that she did not err in discerning the canon of Scripture?”

Because it’s all they have of the words of Christ and His Disciples.

(I don’t believe any Catholic here has proclaimed that God being with them is “exclusive to Catholicism”)

I’ve read many times that all non-Catholics are heretics and that all are going to hell

Best to ask what verse supports the paradigm that the Holy Spirit abandoned His Church.

But that’s not in contention. What’s in contention is the claim that the Holy Spirit is with all Christians.

What canon, then, does this non-Catholic Christian use to discern whether she accepts the teaching or not?

Their conscience.

Should one be conforming one’s views to Christ’s, or should one be finding a church that conforms to one’s own views?

Doesn’t that depend on the person and their conscience and beliefs? I mean, we as Catholics are in a Church that we believe conforms to Christ’s views. But then so is a Baptist, or a Lutheran, or a JW. I don’t necessarily believe that my JW friend was looking for a religion to impose some of the impositions their elders impose on them. But she found God through that faith.

Those who left the Church did so because they were in conflict with one teaching or another. Or maybe they were lost altogether and found Christ in another religion. I see what you’re saying about those who look for a faith that 'fits the bill" because they are indisagreement over one thing or another. But that’s not always the case, especially those born into other religions.

Again, it’s curious that the trust the Church enough to believe our NT discernment, but then to say that they don’t trust the Catholic Church–odd!

Well, on the flipside, I kind of don’t get why it’s so curious to you. The Catholic Church has all the old documents in its vaults. The only thing other religions have is the Bible because they don’t have access to the other documents. Maybe if they had the other documents, they might be able to see a whole different world that our own heirarchy can see? I don’t know. But they only have the Bible, and they had the bible before the sects started breaking off as well. To be honest, I’m kind of suprised that more documents haven’t been made more available by the Church with the internet and all. I know they’ve made some available to the public, but there’s a whole library full of documents that only Catholics have access to. The others don’t have anything else to go on but the Bible.

No, not without a counselor. But truly without a Counselor.

Well, it’s not like we can just pick up the phone and call the Pope, or even our Bishop. So really, is it that difficult to understand others who can’t relate to the Pope as our or their “Couneslor”?

 

[Rence]

I always say, “Where in the Scriptures does it say that the Holy Spirit anointed only first century Christians?”

I’ve never gotten a chapter or verse that answers my question.

Well, those who do not believe in Catholicism evidently can’t be shown proof that the Holy Spirit annointed anyone except that first set of Apostles and disciples. They never got a satisfactory answer either.

It sure is frustrating trying to debate it all out though.

 

[PRmerger]

Well, those who do not believe in Catholicism evidently can’t be shown proof that the Holy Spirit annointed anyone except that first set of Apostles and disciples. They never got a satisfactory answer either.

Yes–this paradigm seems particularly odd to me when in dialogue with non-Catholic Christians. Here they seem to be following the paradigm, 'If it’s not in Scripture then it’s forbidden" ala “there’s no such thing as apostolic since there’s no evidence that anyone except the Apostles and disciples were anointed.”

Yet these same Christians will also, in the same breath, support the paradigm, “If it’s not in Scripture then it’s permitted” ala artificial contraception.

My mantra: pick a paradigm and stick with it! Either “It’s not in Scripture so we can’t do it!” or “It’s not in Scripture so it’s permitted!”

Can’t have it both ways. :nope:

It sure is frustrating trying to debate it all out though.

It certainly can be!

 

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by **PRmerger **
What canon, then, does this non-Catholic Christian use to discern whether she accepts the teaching or not?

Their conscience.

Informed by what?

 

[Nicea325]

Many say well, it does not say that in the Bible. How many of us Catholics have heard this by our Protestant brothers and sisters Re: Transubstantiation, Marian Dogmas, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, Praying the Most Holy Rosary, Purgatory, wearing the Brown Scapular, praying to the Saints, praying for the dead, the word Catholic, etc…etc…etc…

The truth is the Bible does not tell us everything, because Jesus Christ, did not leave the Bible to guide us. Jesus Christ left His Church to guide us by the Power of the Holy Spirit! Amen. Below Jesus Christ said in Matt 16:18

Matt 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Above Jesus Christ states: I will build my Church, not my Bible. So it is the Church that we must adhere to. Don’t get me wrong the Holy Bible is good but it is only this Church that can interpret the Bible. (Hint) The Catholic Church compiled the New Testament, by the Power of the Holy Spirit, So then who’s better by the Power of the Holy Spirit to interpret it.

Matt16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

 The Bible does not have the keys to the Kingdom, therefore the Holy bible does not have this power to bind and loose anything in heaven or on earth, Only the Catholic Church has the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven, to bind and loose anything in heaven or on earth. It is this Church that we must follow and adhere to.

Now, this Catholic Church who has the “Keys” and teaches the truth Re: Transubstantiation, Marian Dogmas, etc…etc… we ALL then must all adhere to it, because no other Church has the Keys to the kingdom and the Gates of hell can not prevail over it.

Let me put it this way: If the Catholic Church says to you, Jump up and down for an hour, then you must jump up and down for an hour, without hesitation, it may sound funny and NO, the Catholic Church will never have you do such a thing as to jump up and down for an hour, only trying to get the point across and that is we all must, must adhere to it. Amen

Only One Church has the Keys to the Kingdom, and we Christians All belong to this one Church. Amen

Ufam Tobie

Whenever a Bible-Only Christian tells me:

That is not in the Bible. I reply:

First show me where the Bible says it must explicitly be said in the Bible?

 

[Rence]

Informed by what?

by their culture, by their surroundings, by how they were raised, by their life experiences, by what comes from inside themselves. Catholics aren’t the only ones with a conscience to guide them.