Protestants, how can this be possible?

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Missed that. Not good in reading comprehension I guess.

Actually I was well aware of this passage by Clement before this thread. It is interesting and I am curious how Protestants would respond to this. Maybe if I get ambitious I will try to google this. I am sure that Protestants are aware of this passage and have some type of response. It will be interesting to see if the response is credible.

Now I do observe that Clement is not “the Bible”. However, what he wrote is valid as a historical account of the church I would think.

So even for now I were to accept this as a valid historical account with the meaning that you claim it has, I can not make the inferences that you make. Specifically.I can not infer…

• The apostles believed this practice must continue for the entire church age no matter what…

AND

• That if a break occurs such as what happened during the reformation, that no matter what the reasons for the break are…(justified or unjustified), that the true church will automatically be that church which retains this practice and the false church will automatically be the church that is split off from this chain.

That is because the apostles had no knowledge of the future direction of the church and the historical event called the Protestant reformation. Of course partisans on both sides will claim that they have the apostles (and God) on their side. But the fact remains that nobody can claim to speak for the apostles. Not even you.

Jesus told the apostles that he would be with them until the end of the world. He also told them to go to every nation and preach the gospel. Even at the time they must have known that this was not physicall possible for the 12 apostles alone.

Breaks in the Church were already ocurring, as we read in Acts 15.

How do we know what the true Church is?

The bible tells us:

1 John 4
6We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

1 Timothy 3
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.

2 Thes 2
15So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Matthew 18

17If 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.

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."

 

[NotTooSmart]

Jesus told the apostles that he would be with them until the end of the world. He also told them to go to every nation and preach the gospel. Even at the time they must have known that this was not physicall possible for the 12 apostles alone.

Breaks in the Church were already ocurring, as we read in Acts 15.

How do we know what the true Church is?

The bible tells us:

1 John 4
6We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

1 Timothy 3
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.

2 Thes 2
15So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Matthew 18

17If 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.

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."

Those are nice Scriptures.

I obviously would make less inferences from them then you do. In other words, I would observe what they do not say.

But you have your interpretation I suppose and it is not my intent to talk you out of your interpretation.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Those are nice Scriptures.

I obviously would make less inferences from them then you do. In other words, I would observe what they do not say.

But you have your interpretation I suppose and it is not my intent to talk you out of your interpretation.

It’s important to read the history of the early Church in order to understand how the eyewitnesses understood these passages.

I am a convert to Catholicism. I once would have argued the same points you are arguing.

However, my position was based on a lack of knowledge.

I would encourage you to keep reading about the early Church.

Best Regards

 

[jmcrae]

Interesting that you should make some reference to this part of your catechism.

Now I have heard some Catholics say that this means: (1) You have been told the CC is “the one true church” (2) you remain a Protestant (3) therefore you do not have salvation.

This assumes that the person understands what they are being told, and still continue to reject it.

Under this interpretation I would expect every Protestant here to fry when they die.

And that would be ridiculous because … (Jesus said, “Narrow is the way, and few there be that find it.”)

But I have also been told what this only applies if you have some type of Epiphany experience where Almighty God tells you (and you absolutely know it is Him) that…yes Virginia the CC IS indeed “The One True Church” and at that point you say no to him.

It is not necessary to have an “Epiphany experience” (although in my case I did, and it was certainly helpful) - all you need is to know with your intellect that the Church is the true Church, and continue to reject it for emotional or practical reasons (I will be disinherited, I have an allergy to incense, I dislike Catholic art, or what have you.)

If this is the meaning, then I would expect that every Protestant here is still cool.

I think there may be Protestants here who know what the Church is and continue to reject it, who are in deep trouble, and there are Protestants here who still think that the Catholic Church is just one of many options that Christ gives us to pick and choose from, and that it doesn’t matter what you pick, as long as you are “being fed.”

 

[NotTooSmart]

I think there may be Protestants here who know what the Church is and continue to reject it, who are in deep trouble, and there are Protestants here who still think that the Catholic Church is just one of many options that Christ gives us to pick and choose from, and that it doesn’t matter what you pick, as long as you are “being fed.”

I know what you claim.

However, when I evaluate the evidence and the counter evidence, I find I must make certain leaps and assumptions to arrive at the same conclusions that you do.

 

[NotTooSmart]

It’s important to read the history of the early Church in order to understand how the eyewitnesses understood these passages.

I am a convert to Catholicism. I once would have argued the same points you are arguing.

However, my position was based on a lack of knowledge.

I would encourage you to keep reading about the early Church.

Best Regards

I actually agree with this,. I recall reading that John Wesley believed that it was important to interpret the Bible correctly using the lens of history. I agree with Mr. Wesley.

Using the lens of history allows me to summarily reject nice new creative interpretations of the Bible like the Prosperity Gosple, Name-it-Claim-It, Pro Choice, Gay Marriage as wrong and out of the context of the historical church.

 

[jmcrae]

I know what you claim.

However, when I evaluate the evidence and the counter evidence, I find I must make certain leaps and assumptions to arrive at the same conclusions that you do.

What “leaps and assumptions”? It seems self-evident that the Church of the New Testament was not just a gaggle of like-minded folk wandering around the streets, but that it was an authoritative body with organization and structure, with its headquarters at the Cenacle.

 

[NotTooSmart]

What “leaps and assumptions”? It seems self-evident that the Church of the New Testament was not just a gaggle of like-minded folk wandering around the streets, but that it was an authoritative body with organization and structure, with its headquarters at the Cenacle.

What is the “Cenacle”? (never mind…that is why we have google)

There are several.

One major one is the historical event known as the Protestant reformation. Catholic apologetics only makes sense if God’s view of the Protestant reformation is the same as the view of partisan Catholics.

Of course there is an alternative perspective of the Protestant reformation that is put forth by partisan Protestants.

What the partisans on both sides neglect to mention is that God just might have an opinion concerning this event that does not line up with what the partisans on both sides tell me His opinion is. Then all bets are off concerning the apologetics of both sides.

Another one is what exactly is the authority structure by which an individual Christian is to receive and discern Spiritual truth. I am sure this has been debated ad nauseum on both sides here. And I am also sure that neither side has been able to prove their case (I honestly don’t know how either side can be proved anyway).

I could probably think of more but these are two that stick out at first glance.

But these are separate topic I suppose.

 

[jmcrae]

What is the “Cenacle”?

There are several.

One major one is the historical event known as the Protestant reformation. Catholic apologetics only makes sense if God’s view of the Protestant reformation is the same as the view of partisan Catholics.

I am sure you are aware that the Scottish Reformers broke the heads off of the statues of the Apostles at St. Andrew’s Cathedral (yes, that St. Andrew’s, with the golf course out back of it) as a signal of their break with Apostolic Succession. Yes, the early Protestants (at least some of them) knew exactly what they were doing - that in making the break from the Catholic Church, they were breaking with any association with the Apostles. They continue to proudly display those broken statues as a symbol of their freedom from “the tyranny of tradition.” They consciously intended to start up a new religion that had nothing whatsoever to do with the religion of the Apostles of Jesus Christ.

What the partisans on both sides neglect to mention is that God just might have an opinion concerning this event that does not line up with what the partisans on both sides tell me His opinion is. Then all bets are off concerning the apologetics of both sides.

The only comparable incident that we find in Scripture is found in Numbers 16. I suggest that you read it for yourself, rather than think I am putting some kind of “spin” on the story.

Another one is what exactly is the authority structure by which an individual Christian is to receive and discern Spiritual truth.

The root of the word “authority” is “author.” You can look at what has authority, by looking at who is its author.

 

[Libertarian_FL]

Read Acts 2:42-47

The Believers Form a Community
42 All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper*), and to prayer.
43 A deep sense of awe came over them all, and the apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders.44 And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had.45 They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need.46 They worshiped together at the Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord’s Supper, and shared their meals with great joy and generosity*—47 all the while praising God and enjoying the goodwill of all the people. And each day the Lord added to their fellowship those who were being saved. [NLT]

That is the way of Jesus not a tithe but sacrificing all you have and sharing that with each other and the poor, now tell me which of the great and small denominations bears such fruit?

And don’t say the Apostles and that includes Peter didn’t support this it does say ALL believers.

 

[NotTooSmart]

I am sure you are aware that the Scottish Reformers broke the heads off of the statues of the Apostles at St. Andrew’s Cathedral (yes, that St. Andrew’s, with the golf course out back of it) as a signal of their break with Apostolic Succession. Yes, the early Protestants (at least some of them) knew exactly what they were doing - that in making the break from the Catholic Church, they were breaking with any association with the Apostles. They continue to proudly display those broken statues as a symbol of their freedom from “the tyranny of tradition.” They consciously intended to start up a new religion that had nothing whatsoever to do with the religion of the Apostles of Jesus Christ.

The only comparable incident that we find in Scripture is found in Numbers 16. I suggest that you read it for yourself, rather than think I am putting some kind of “spin” on the story.

The root of the word “authority” is “author.” You can look at what has authority, by looking at who is its author.

Actually I am not that familiar with the Scottish reformation. I am only armchair at this type of stuff admittedly.

Of course I would expect a Catholic partisan to claim that the reformation was the equivalent to Korah’s rebellion of the OT. Of course a Protestant partisan would have a slightly different take on the topic.

What I don’t know of course is God’s opinion since He is not chiming into this thread.

I have observed that there are other logical interpretations to the reformation than those put forth by partisans on both sides. In examining the evidence as I know it, my inclination would be to reject the interpretations of partisans on all sides.

 

[jmcrae]

Actually I am not that familiar with the Scottish reformation. I am only armchair at this type of stuff admittedly.

You might look into it. The reasons behind the Lutheran reformation might also be an eye-opener for you.

 

[jmcrae]

That is the way of Jesus not a tithe but sacrificing all you have and sharing that with each other and the poor, now tell me which of the great and small denominations bears such fruit?

Members of Catholic religious orders do that. It’s not practical for families with children to do that, but if you look at the various monastic orders of the Catholic Church, you find that the vow of poverty means that they give everything they earn to their community, and one person is in charge of looking after the shopping, etc., for that house.

And don’t say the Apostles and that includes Peter didn’t support this it does say ALL believers.

Yes, the Early Church did indeed function somewhat like a Catholic monastic community.

 

[PJM]

=NotTooSmart-Actually I think the issue started with John Calvin. And he claims to have been influenced by Augustine.

And anyway, your own catechism states that Protestants are saved by virtue of their trinitarian baptism even though from your perspective they teach error.

If eternal security was an issue of heaven or hell, then Billy Graham, whom your pope JP called his brother would be in hell. I wouldn’t think that your pope would be wrong in discerning Billy Graham as a brother in Christ now.

Well you’re almost right.

All salvation is through the Catholic Church who “holds the keys to the kingdom of God.”

It is a mysterious manner deemed possible by God. But Cathoics are not assured of slavation [even though we can know with certitude that we are in the State of grace needed to get there] because we are “all sinners.” If anyone, Catholic, non Catholic alike die with unrepented and unconfessed Mortal sin, heaven will be in the opposite direction of where such a sole ends up.

 

[PJM]

=NotTooSmart;5733649]Interesting that you should make some reference to this part of your catechism.

Now I have heard some Catholics say that this means: (1) You have been told the CC is “the one true church” (2) you remain a Protestant (3) therefore you do not have salvation.

Under this interpretation I would expect every Protestant here to fry when they die.

But I have also been told what this only applies if you have some type of Epiphany experience where Almighty God tells you (and you absolutely know it is Him) that…yes Virginia the CC IS indeed “The One True Church” and at that point you say no to him.

If this is the meaning, then I would expect that every Protestant here is still cool.

Forgive me for bursting your bubble. But who do you think sent you to this site? Surely you don’t think it was your idea? And Why would God send to this site?

You may wish to rethink your understanding friend. Eternity is a long time.

If God used Peter for His Good Works, is it not possible He is using some of us Catholics too?

Love and prayers,

 

[wisdomseeker]

And of course that is your interpretation of the historical account. That God was on the side of the Catholics during the historical event called the reformation.

Of course partisans on the other side say God was on their side during the event called the reformation.

Unfortunately, what we don’t have here is God chiming in telling us what He thinks. So I am left with the opinions of man claiming to speak for God.

reformation, what reformation? there is no reformation outside the CC.

the reform has to occur within the Church to be called reformation. this is not what happened. common sense should tell you that.
a priest cannot go outside the Church, become an authority which is exercised by many within the Church and create a whole new theology and call this a reform of the CC.
the proof is that the CC still here just like the Lord promised.

sure the CC has many troubles just like in the beginning of the Church because we are humans and we easily make troubles. but our Lord said in the beginning that the gates of hell would not prevail against it. our Lord knew exactly what He was saying and why and so do us Catholics. many has tried to destroy this Church to no avail. many emperors, many kings, martin luther, hitler, henry the VIII and many others. this is one of the greatest miracle of our Lord to keep His Church alive throughout the ages. even at times like today with so many confusion about His Word.

someone must be lying and someone must be telling the Truth.
which one is it? it is easy to determine.
is the Eucharistia the True Body and Blood of Christ? how can one know? do you believe that protestants is right denying it? who has the right to administer the Sacraments?

i sincerely understand your confusion. who wouldnt be? with so many different enterpretation of God s Word all around us. you probably think that since m luther left the CC and formulated a whole new theology. the CC stop being once the One True Church.

if you are willing you can check this site for more on what the Church is.
zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m3/4mrkc.html

 

[PJM]

=wisdomseeker-reformation, what reformation? there is no reformation outside the CC.

the reform has to occur within the Church to be called reformation. this is not what happened. common sense should tell you that.
a priest cannot go outside the Church, become an authority which is exercised by many within the Church and create a whole new theology and call this a reform of the CC.
the proof is that the CC still here just like the Lord promised.

sure the CC has many troubles just like in the beginning of the Church because we are humans and we easily make troubles. but our Lord said in the beginning that the gates of hell would not prevail against it. our Lord knew exactly what He was saying and why and so do us Catholics. many has tried to destroy this Church to no avail. many emperors, many kings, martin luther, hitler, henry the VIII and many others. this is one of the greatest miracle of our Lord to keep His Church alive throughout the ages. even at times like today with so many confusion about His Word.

someone must be lying and someone must be telling the Truth.
which one is it? it is easy to determine.
is the Eucharistia the True Body and Blood of Christ? how can one know? do you believe that protestants is right denying it? who has the right to administer the Sacraments?

i sincerely understand your confusion. who wouldnt be? with so many different enterpretation of God s Word all around us. you probably think that since m luther left the CC and formulated a whole new theology. the CC stop being once the One True Church.

if you are willing you can check this site for more on what the Church is.
zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m3/4mrkc.html

The Bible is true, and factual. Some just can’t seem to get it:shrug: 2 Peter 3: 14 –17 14 Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

2 Cor. 4: 2 “We have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways; we refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing."

Love and prayers friends,

 

[wisdomseeker]

The Bible is true, and factual. Some just can’t seem to get it:shrug: 2 Peter 3: 14 –17 14 Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

2 Cor. 4: 2 “We have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways; we refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing."

Love and prayers friends,

most protestant do not understand how serious the Word of God is.
they dont seem to even care what the Word of God really means.
i have a friend who is a presbiterian and when i presented to her the Eucharistia is the True Body and Blood of Christ, she simply said: it does not really matter if it is just a representation or if it is the True Body and Blood of Christ. they dont seem to understand how important and serious this is.

they dont seem to get it… i dont blame them. they are just a result of a false teachings.
but as father Groeschel said one time: only by the Grace of God one can see the CC.
for one to see this Church, one must come to God with great humility and ask for this Grace.

they dont seem to be able to see how important the CC is. not because of she is the CC but because she is the Church our Lord Himself found and commanded her to go into the World and teach all men. He never said for each disciple to go their own way. His will is that His Church be One, One Faith, One Spirit. One Spirit, One Teach and not many teachings.
it is impossible for this Spirit to tell the CC the Eucharitia is the Body and Blood of Christ and then tell protestants that it isnt. if one knows God, knows very that this is impossible. only an evil spirit would contradicts God.

unless the Church has been wrong from the times of the Apostles, one must know that something is wrong in here.

 

[Bushmaster78FS]

I’m actually hoping for a united Protestant church someday soon. There’s mainly very minor differences between the Protestant sects.

Sup Supreme? Expanding horizons away from CF? In actually there are VAST differences between Protestant sects, compare Pentecostals and Baptists here in the US for example. You would probably want to start seeking within you why you want to see a united Protestant Church, or why united Church? Then ask yourself if there was a time during our history that Church was ONE, undivided, united… You will find the Apostolic Church. Then your search takes you on a quite interesting journey. I was there …

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by CHESTERTONRULES
That is self proclaimed.

AHHHH - So here we have the crux of the matter “methinks”, and the very reason that The Church, from the earliest Days on, has held to an authoritative Church to deal with such disagreements.

Christ Prayed for us to be One as He and the Father are One. Being that unified leaves little room for different beliefs.
To that end He provided a means to determine Truth when two, well meaning, fellow Christians disagreed. The Solution is found in The Holy Bible itself. It is in Mt 18:15-18.
The implementation of this instruction relating to Doctrine/teaching/practice is seen also in The Holy Bible, in Acts 15.

Now we can see over and over here on the forums where Good Christians differ on important issues. There is not doubt but that each is sincere, but because of the nature of the differences, there is equally no doubt that one or the other must be wrong. (OSAS is one such issue.) Here on the boards we are able to complete the first two portions of the instruction since several people will chime in from each side. (“Bring two or three witnesses so that each fact may be confirmed”.) That leaves only the last part of the instruction to be fulfilled. The part where we are to, “Tell It To The Church”, and then abide by the decision of The Church, (acting with Christ’s own authority,) or face seperation from The Church, from the Body of Christ.

I only ask here that those who espouse “Sola Scriptura” and reject the unified and Authoritative aspect of Christ’s Church carefully consider the above. I know of no way for the un-unified NCC churches to effectively implement this clear command of Christ.

Peace
James