In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.
–St. Augustine
This quote was one on the logo for an Evangelical Church i once attended regularly. It’s also one of the few quotes from the early Church Fathers i’ve heard taught by Protestants. The thing about reformer 1, reformer 2 and reformer 3 is that (at least from an Evangelical Christian’s point of view) it does not matter whom you prefer, as long as each agrees with the essential doctrines of the historic Christian Faith. There is a Protestant organization that has experts on staff from many different denominations, and from non-denominational churches. The members of this organization disagree on matters which they consider non-essentials, such as Church government, and the perpetuity of spiritual gifts, but they agree on the essentials, which are the nature of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit, they say, is OK with their differences, as long as they all hold to the essentials. Hence, He does not contradict Himself.
Now, let’s say that reformer 4 comes along and teaches what they believe to be a different Gospel, or a different understanding of who God is. That person they would not consider a Christian, for he does not hold to the doctrines which are essential for a Christian to believe in order to be a genuine Christian. In this case, they claim, the Holy Spirit would reject reformer 4 as teaching a different Gospel and a different Jesus, as would they.
But isn’t this the same in the Catholic Church, albeit to a lesser degree? While matters of Church government might be considered essential doctrine, the perpetuity of spiritual gifts is apparently not. Here in the South Bend area of Indiana, where Purdue University resides, is what many believe to be the center of the Charismatic Catholic movement. There are Catholic priests speaking in tongues, and other Catholic priests interpreting what is said, in the unknown language, into English. These translated messages, the priests claim, are direct communication from God Himself to their parishes.
Now the bishop presiding over these parishes, and the Pope who is overseeing the bishop, do not condemn the practice. But there are many Catholics who might, and bishops who would never tolerate such practice in their own parishes. Would you say that, since there is such disagreement, that the Holy Spirit contradicts Himself? Or would you say, as do i, that these are non-essentials over which Christians may disagree, but over which they should never divide. A Catholic from South Bend, and a Catholic from Rome, might have a lively debate about speaking in tongues, but afterward should go out for a pizza together. Don’t you think?
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger2/6199/482881998206850/1600/viena02.jpg
A Charismatic Catholic Mass