Pope Says There is Only One True Church

[bilboj1]

Orwell?

 

[guanophore]

although we love our Orthodox siblings, they left us, not the other way around

Let’s be fair. We both excommunicated one another. Shame on us.

 

[guanophore]

What substance?

You make an assertion that is not true. Protestant don’t claim to have “discovered” anything.

Luther did discover quite a bit. Through his reading and study of the scripture, he discovered that his understanding of what the scriptures meant was not consistent with the Church as he knew it.

Luther wasn’t seeking to take the church in new directions.

I think, as he saw it, that the church needed to return to the direction it had under the Apostles. It was “new” in the sense that Luther did not think it had been practiced for 1000 years.

Like St. Francis of Assisi before him, he saw a church that needed to be rebuilt. Unlike in the case of St. Francis he wasn’t allowed to do it from within because the church had no desire to return to the holy ground she had once occupied and preferred to continue in her errors.

I think this is not the case. In the day of St. Francis, there were a majority that had no desire to return to the holy ground that Christ walked upon. There still are not! the life of poverty and radical faith St. Francis lived is still beyond the reach of most. However, I not that St. Francis, as well as other Saints of the Reformation period, were undaunted by the personal failures of the members of the Church. They persisted in their faith, and made their faith perfect in love. Luther, on the other hand, was angry, resentful, and indignant. He was not able to reform from within due to a lack of humility and obedience.

Because she was in error and she decided to persist in those errors, it is not the Protestant who left the faith, but the Catholic Church that abandoned her call.

Certainly many Catholics, some of them Popes and Bishops, have personally abandoned God’s call, and demonstrated a poor witness. However, this is not to be equated with the Church as Jesus created her. There is one body, and we are all individually members of it. Some of the members, sadly, are given to immorality. What are Protestants “protesting”?

Fortunately, God raised up a Martin Luther and the Church of Jesus Christ was still preserved and the Gates of Hell have not been able to prevail against it. But without a Luther, jsut as without a St. Francis before him, that surely would have happened.

God is able to preserve His church apart for vanity, resentment, and rapacity. These qualities I find in Luther, but not in St. Francis. I think there is a difference of approach here.

 

[guanophore]

Hard-headedness.

And no different in character, I suspect, than the hard headedness that we find in the book of Acts present in the early church, up until that hardness of heart and head that caused the Latins to and Easterns to excommunicate one another. Jesus must cry over us.

 

[Mannyfit75]

What a shame that this discussion regarding the Orthodox church isnt being conducted on the Eastern Christianity forum and thereby getting a better cross section of opinions east and west. Here you will be getting a very lopsided RC opinion without the benefit of Eastern Orthodox (name removed by moderator)ut. IMHO

I have deep respect with the EO, and the Vatican attempt to reconcil both churches to be One Church. Until the EO acknowledge that Primacy of the Pope, and then I can happily say they do contain the fullness of Truth. All they have are bishops or Patriarchs…There is no core authority to unit all faith in E. Orthodoxy.

In the Catholic Church, the Pope units all Catholic Churches, Byzantine and Latin.

 

[guanophore]

Again you keep making statements that assume facts that simply aren’t true.

Sadly, it is true that most Protestants do ignore all of history from the book of Acts to the present. A lot of them don’t even now who Martin Luther is!

NOT ALL who went before Luther interpreted it differently. And Catholics have no more access to scripture and tradition than anyone else does.

There has always been some dissention, but the official teaching of the church has not changed. This is an interesting asserion about “access”. Perhaps no one has more “access” to scripture and tradition. However, given that the scripture is a Catholic book, and that it was never meant to be separated from the Tradition that formed it, it does limit ones understanding of it when that Tradition is denied.

 

[East_Anglican]

OK. So flyersfan doesn’t admire Martin Luther. I can understand that. What I don’t understand is the statement that “if it were not for Luther CAF would not be necessary”. Such a view to me implies that the purpose of CAF is to counteract the consequences of Luther, either by trying to fight or win back non-Catholic Christians. Surely there is more to Catholic life than such an attitude. Things like growing in one’s own faith, sharing the good news of Christ with the non-Christian world (not just Protestant Christians), reaching out the hands of fellowship and brotherhood to all Christians of every background (even those of differing theological persuasions would seem to be good reasons for CAF.

This is interesting. Roman Catholics speak against Luther for ‘courseing division’ and then say how wonderful The Pope is for keeping the division going by saying that his church is the only true church.

One does not have to be in 100% agreement about all things to be of the same Church. Even within Catholicism there have been and continue to be differences on many things, some of them even important things. I think that we believe in the same Lord and share the same baptism ought to be enough to see our oneness as greater than our differences. It is for me.

Amen

Feeding people without regard to whether they fully understand all of your theology (vs. 1-15) is in fact exactly part of what I am talking about. And when Jesus says, “this bread is my flesh that I shall give for the life of the world” (vs 51) does that not also call those who represent the body of Christ in the world today to be willing to give themselves for the life of the world?

Amen, we are the body of Christ. If Roman Catholics take the sacrement without recognising Protestants as the body of Christ they drink judgement on themselves, as do Protestants when they partake of the sacrament and do not recognise Roman Catholics as the body of Christ.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Sadly, it is true that most Protestants do ignore all of history from the book of Acts to the present. A lot of them don’t even now who Martin Luther is!

It seems that is not limited to Protestants. I don’t know about in other countries, but I find most Americans (of any religious background) know very little history. What I was objecting to is the idea that

The usual way that proestants approach this is to ignore all Church Hisotry from the End of Acts to Luther.

Those protestants who actually bother to approach a discussion about the Church, don’t ignore that there is history between Acts and Luther. That would be like saying that most Protestants ignored the ecumenical councils of the early church. Given how common the use of the Apostles’ and Nicene Creed are in Protestant churches itself puts the lie to the idea that most Protestants ignore all Church history between Acts and Luther.

Now, if the statement had been that most Protestants pick and choose what from Church history they find useful and accept and what they reject, then I would have to say, guilty as charged.

 

[4EVER_Catholic]

Hopefully not that many. Most Protestants know about this anyway.

The ones I forsee getting worked up about it will be the ones that do not even consider us Christians ironically- they seem to care the most about what we do.

Oh very well put and my sentiment exactly. I couldn’t have said it better.

 

[4EVER_Catholic]

"In the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep (Jn 21:15-19), down to the present episcopate.
"And so, lastly, does the very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.
“Such then in number and importance are the precious ties belonging to the Christian name which keep a believer in the Catholic Church, as it is right they should … With you, where there is none of these things to attract or keep me… No one shall move me from the faith which binds my mind with ties so many and so strong to the Christian religion… For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.”
— St. Augustine

Who could put it better!

 

[Grace_Seeker]

The Catholic Church being the One True Church is nothing new, but I am glad that the Vatican reminded the Protestant churches of this, and I forsee that there are gonna be many angry protestants.

Hopefully not that many. Most Protestants know about this anyway.

The ones I forsee getting worked up about it will be the ones that do not even consider us Christians ironically- they seem to care the most about what we do.

Oh very well put and my sentiment exactly. I couldn’t have said it better.

I let Hellisreal’s comment go the first time, but as you read back through this thread and see the Protestants who got worked up, what did you actually observe? What I saw was:

1. the most already did know this was the Catholic church’s long-held opinion.
2. an understanding that the Pope was just reiterating Catholic theolog
3. that Catholic are Christian
4. and that this view was still insulting and demeaning to non-Catholic Christians because the theology itself is fundamentally flawed (you don’t have to challenge that view, the whole thread has been about that point)
5. though Catholics say that they are just telling the truth and expressing love, it sure doesn’t come across that way.

While said statement may have been for and accomplished the purpose of teaching and building up what the Pope views as the one true Church, it did little to foster an ecumenical spirit or show love toward others that are also in Christ, for it seems to be a denial of their very connection with Christ. Even reading this thread you will see some Catholics agreeing that while non-Catholics may not make up the one true Church that we are all part of the body of Christ, and others who seem to deny that a non-Catholic can even qualify as a genuine Christian. And this is after the Pope’s letter.

Yes, the result has been to make a few people angry and stir some things up. The good part is that it got people talking once again. The bad part is the type of conversations that I have seen. Those Protestants who did not consider Catholics to be Christians before are going to be either unchanged or affirmed in their views. Those Catholics who did not consider Protestants to be a part of Christendom before are strengthened in their views. Those Catholics who did view Protestants to be brothers and sisters in Christ are drawn no closer to them. And those Protestants who did view Catholics to be brothers and sisters in Christ have been insulted by the emphasis and focus on the nature of their separatedness versus their connections as brothers and sisters in Christ.

And 4EVER_Catholic, you see Hellisreal’s comment as being praiseworthy. What I see is an inability on the part of many Catholics to view the world from anyone’s perspective but their own. But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe it isn’t an inability, Maybe it is an unwillingness – a feeling that I’m right so I don’t have to understand or care about the experiences and feelings of others who are so obviously in the wrong.

 

[nonsumd]

Lastly, since you bring up the issue of being “biblical”, Purgatory is NOT biblical. Don’t quote from 1 Corinthians because that verse has absolutely nothing to do with Purgatory.

I respect your right to believe the Pope can make infallible declarations and to believe the evolving and innovative doctrines as the Latin Rite creates them.

Rev North,

I have the utmost reverence for the Eastern Orthodox Church, believing as our Pope John Paul of happy memory always stressed, that Christendom must breathe with both its lungs, the Western and the Eastern again.

However, sometimes I get the impression that Orthodox authorities insist on seeing differences where in substance they do not exist. Orthodox reject the Latin Church’s term “purgatory,” yet believe in something which is essentially the same, “final [post-mortem] theosis,” and offer prayers for the benefit of souls in that condition.

The Latin Church, facing different challenges from those facing the Greek Church and having in the pope an authoritative voice without parallel in the Greek Church, has defined a number of doctrines more specifically than the Greek Church has done. I have heard that the Orthodox do not hold to the Catholic concept of Original Sin and yet they recognize something called “ancestral sin” – whatever actual difference there may be between the two ideas, that difference is nothing compared to the difference between both on the one hand and Protestant notions such as “total depravity” (we may dealing here with a reductionist reading of Catholicism as “Augustinian” and with a selective understanding of Augustine’s thought).

It is simply that the fullness of faith (the apostolic faith) is maintained in the Orthodox Church from which the Latin church went into schism.

When it comes to the more substantive Christological issues, which of the Apostolic Patriarchates, never fell into heresy? It was Rome. Which patriarchate unstintingly defended icons against iconoclast Byzantine emperors? It was Rome. There would be no “Triumph of Orthodoxy” for the Orthodox to celebrate as a major feast, if Roman popes had not defied emperors in Constantinople.

We Catholics and Orthodox should view our differences as more ones of emphasis rather than of substance. Compared to all we share (apostolic succession, sacraments, veneration of Mary and the saints, the canon of scripture, recognition of Sacred Tradition, …), the differences don’t amount to much, wouldn’t you say?

 

[nonsumd]

I find it sad that the predominantly secular (and even anti-religious) media has exploited the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s recent clarification of Vatican II’s teachings about the nature of the Church to sow discord among Christians.

The document insists on a distinction between “churches” (ecclesiae (referring to the Catholic, Orthodox, and other Eastern Churches) and “eccelesial communities” (Protestant sects). “Ecclesia” literally means a “calling out”; in the Catholic understanding, this “calling out” refers to a specific act of institution by Christ, one documented after the fact in Scripture. This specific act was Christ investing authority in His Apostles, an authority passed down to the bishops of the Catholic, Orthodox, and other Eastern Churches.

The phrase “ecclesial community” suggests to my ear a “churchlike” community or a community “of the church,” perhaps “split off of” a church. Communities of believers founded essentially on a specific individual’s reading of Scripture (e.g. Luther’s or Calvin’s) cannot be called “churches” by the Catholic/Orthodox definition because they have not been founded by a specific act of institution by Christ Himself.

Perhaps we might say that an “ecclesiastical community” is a “church” called into existence in an “extra-ordinary way,” i.e. not in the ordained way, not in the Christ-ordained form (with sacraments administered by priests ordained by bishops in the apostolic succession).

All that being said, the CDF document states that, even though Protestant sects are not “churches,” Christ’s Spirit still works through them, is present in them. Just like the phrase “separated brethren,” this formulation recognizes Protestants as fellow Christians – and does not exclude non-Catholics from the possibility of salvation (and, we should remember, Catholics aren’t guaranteed salvation simply because they are Catholics in the way some Protestants believe that being a Protestant of a certain denomination, i.e. being a Protestant who believes the “right things” as defined by a particular Protestant sect, is guaranteed salvation).

What the CDF statement does not do is wish away the fact that currently the communion among Christians is imperfect, not in any way unity of the kind Christ desires. As such, the statement, actually addressed to Catholics and not to Protestants, should function not as a barrier to reunification but as a spur to pursuing eventual genuine unity.

The greatest obstacle to the unity of Christians is not the CDF’s reiteration of Catholic teaching but the persistence of many Protestant groups in demonizing the Catholic Church as the "Whore of Babylon"and the Pope as the “Antichrist” – the belief in the supposed “apostasy” of the Catholic Church from the “Early Church” is central to many Protestant communities’ self-definition. For such sects, conceding any continuity between the Catholic Church and the Apostles is tantamount to losing their raison d’etre.

Protestants need not be offended if they truly hold to a different definition of what constitutes a “church” from Catholics – what Catholicism defines as an “eccleasial community,” who it defines as “Christian,” corresponds to what Protestants define as “church.” One can be a “Christian” even when in imperfect communion with Christ’s ordained Churches, Catholic or Orthodox.

Genuine tolerance, respect, and love for another group is shown when one both affirms similarities and recognizes differences, not when one pretends there are no differences that matter, i.e. when one gives in to what is in effect relativism.

 

[Philothea53]

The thing is we actually removed him, we didn’t simply move him to another place to repeat his actions, that is my concern with the stories coming out of the Catholic Church. It isn’t the individual priests, but the institutional sins that are so troubling.

(continued below)

I know I am not part of this conversation, but this part of your post troubled me, for I find this same kind of pride in many stories I read of clergy abuses in non-Catholic denominations. You may have ‘actually removed him’ but that only means he is no longer serving your particular church. As a non-Catholic protestant, this man is free to move across town and start over without anyone ever knowing of his sins. It is the great organization of the Catholic Church that caused/allowed the sins of Her Priests to come to light in a way that no non-Catholic denomination has had to suffer through. Your lack of humility in this regard troubles me.

God bless you.

 

[SyCarl]

I know I am not part of this conversation, but this part of your post troubled me, for I find this same kind of pride in many stories I read of clergy abuses in non-Catholic denominations. You may have ‘actually removed him’ but that only means he is no longer serving your particular church. As a non-Catholic protestant, this man is free to move across town and start over without anyone ever knowing of his sins. It is the great organization of the Catholic Church that caused/allowed the sins of Her Priests to come to light in a way that no non-Catholic denomination has had to suffer through. Your lack of humility in this regard troubles me.

God bless you.

This might be true with independent churches but not with all Protestant denominations as many have a national structure. For example, in the Presbyterian Church such information would go through the Presbytery and would be none to any Presbyterian Church that was thinking of calling the minister and, in fact, his previous Presbytery must be informed of any call. As to going to a different denomination, it would be a question whether they would accept an ordained Presbyterian minister in the first place.
It may not be a perfect system but hopefully it would catch something like this.
Of course, it is best if abuse can be stopped before it occurs.

 

[Philothea53]

This might be true with independent churches but not with all Protestant denominations as many have a national structure. For example, in the Presbyterian Church such information would go through the Presbytery and would be none to any Presbyterian Church that was thinking of calling the minister and, in fact, his previous Presbytery must be informed of any call. As to going to a different denomination, it would be a question whether they would accept an ordained Presbyterian minister in the first place.
It may not be a perfect system but hopefully it would catch something like this.
Of course, it is best if abuse can be stopped before it occurs.

Are you taking about the Presbyterian Church (USA) or the Presbyterian Church in America, or the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, or the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, or the Reformed Presbyterian Church, or the Bible Presbyterian Church, or the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (ARP Synod), or the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, or the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States (RPCUS)?

 

[SyCarl]

Are you taking about the Presbyterian Church (USA) or the Presbyterian Church in America, or the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, or the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, or the Reformed Presbyterian Church, or the Bible Presbyterian Church, or the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (ARP Synod), or the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, or the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States (RPCUS)?

I am talking about the Presbyterian Church in Canada, but as far as I am aware, all Presbyterian Churches have the same organizational structure.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

I know I am not part of this conversation, but this part of your post troubled me, for I find this same kind of pride in many stories I read of clergy abuses in non-Catholic denominations. You may have ‘actually removed him’ but that only means he is no longer serving your particular church. As a non-Catholic protestant, this man is free to move across town and start over without anyone ever knowing of his sins. It is the great organization of the Catholic Church that caused/allowed the sins of Her Priests to come to light in a way that no non-Catholic denomination has had to suffer through. Your lack of humility in this regard troubles me.

God bless you.

I don’t think you understand what I mean by removing him. We dodn’t just remove him from his post. No, we removed him from his post, stripped him of his credentials, and reported him to the secular authorities for criminal action. What more would you have us do, publish his name in the paper?

The Catholic church is doing better now, but in the past it was the common practice of the institution of the Catholic church that would merely transfer someone from this parish to a new parish elsewhere where those abuses continued unfettered.

I have no pride in that we had to remove someone. It means we had a failure. As one who participates in the process by which persons are screened for service in the church, I know that it means we still have work to do in both our screening and supervising processes. I also know that it was only slightly more than a generation ago that we ourselves were guilty of not following up on issues and investigating them, but simply moving people when problems developed, just like the Catholic church had done. Who knows how many cases were about more than personality conflicts but perhaps something more nefarious.

Should this man be tried by our state’s legal system we will provide all assisstance that we can. Should he not be tried, he will still never have opportunity to serve in our denomination again. Should he go to another denomination and they seek references from us, we will tell them the truth. Should they accept a person in ministry without references or screening, then I hardly think it proper for the Catholic church to hold us accountable.

Because I have been part of the screening process, I can tell you that we would like the Catholic church to be a little bit more forthcoming still. There are those who have been in ministry in other denominations, including some in process in the Catholic church to become priests or nuns, that have left their original church to become candidates for ministry in our denomination. Each story is uniquely different, so I will not generalize about the reasons. We do legal background checks and ask for references of all persons applying for candidacy in our system. Among those references are not only personal references that the person volunteers, but supervisors in ministry, previous employment, or in one’s adjudicatory. Sometime the Catholic church has only been willing to confirm that an individual had been with them, and not provide us with anymore information about the quality or performance of their ministry. If this person has sins (or even not sins, but just is one who does not work well with others in ministry) is not the Catholic church alllowing them the freedom to walk across town and start over without giving anyone the chance to know of his/her sins?

I understand that there is a fine line between what is appropriate information that needs to be shared and protecting confidentiality. But you need to take a longer look in the mirror if you really think that this issue is more of a non-Catholic problem. The level of pride you yourself have in the way your church handles these things may be somewhat misplaced.

 

[4EVER_Catholic]

Grace_Seeker, I don’t feel I really need to respond to you but I will just the same. Your so upset that I agreed with another poster about the Catholic Church being the one and only. Well for one it is and second Protestants say we are a cult one that deviates from our Lord. I will say and believe what I wish to believe in and what I know to be true. Just as you will do the same.

Your just a typical Catholic hating person and you have to deal with that not me. We as Catholics will take care of our own and will make sure that bad priests stay away and receive the punishment they deserve. I have more comments but I prefer to keep them to myself.

I’m proud to be Catholic and I hold my head up high. I will not allow you or anyone else to make me feel ashamed or hang my head for you to make you happy. This is one Catholic that will never become of your faith.

 

[East_Anglican]

The Latin Church, facing different challenges from those facing the Greek Church and having in the pope an authoritative voice without parallel in the Greek Church, has defined a number of doctrines more specifically than the Greek Church has done. I have heard that the Orthodox do not hold to the Catholic concept of Original Sin and yet they recognize something called “ancestral sin” – whatever actual difference there may be between the two ideas, that difference is nothing compared to the difference between both on the one hand and Protestant notions such as “total depravity” (we may dealing here with a reductionist reading of Catholicism as “Augustinian” and with a selective understanding of Augustine’s thought).

The doctrine of total depravity is a Calvinist doctrine. Not all protestants are Calvinists.