(SPLIT & MERGED) Do Protestants hold to a different definition of "church"?

[thenobes]

Wow:
that certainly was a lot to read:

I was hoping for a “yes or no” answer

As the word ekkleisa is used in the NT:
Are there any believers who are not part of the ekklesia ?
Are there any unbelievers included in the ekklesia?
Maybe the questions cannot be answered with a " yes or no"

the “all who believe” and “the whole body of faithful” seem to indicate that all believers are part of the ekklesia and no unbelievers are part of the ekklesia:
Do you see it that way?

Romans 2
14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

They may be excused by their thoughts.

This is what Randy means by saying that pursuing the truth implicitly makes one a follower of Christ and hence a member of the Church.

peace
steve

 

[toaslan]

and back to the OP …

Are there any believers who are not part of the ekklesia ?

Are there any unbelievers included in the ekklesia?

Why believers?

We are saved by grace…

Grace flows from Jesus Christ through Mary through the Church out to all mankind. Many are saved.

There are the ordinary means of salvation: the sacraments. This is the mode God has revealed to the world–this is His provision for us.

There are extraordinary means of salvation. As such–outside the ordinary–they are obscure, unknown to us. These means of salvation depend on individual exceptions to the provision, exceptions made by God in Trinitarian privacy. This area is understood to exist, but it is veiled, unrevealed.

The Catholic Church is the ordinary means of salvation for all mankind. Membership in it can be actual or potential. By potential I do not mean any less real.

Take the extreme case of a man brought up from infancy on a desert island by monkeys. Can he be saved? According to Romans, yes. If he is saved, it will have been because he is in some real sense a member of the Catholic Church, though he has never heard the name of Christ, let alone been anywhere near a baptismal font.

The gift of God’s life saves; when we live the gift, we are saved. The ordinary revealed way to do this is through the sacraments of the Church; extraordinary ways no doubt exist. All of the salvific ways will be about living the grace of incorporation, whether that membership is understood as such or not.

To insist upon a divine exception for oneself would be presumptuous, and it would not work if the subject knew the Catholic Church was the Body of Christ. If he were truly innocent in mistaking the exception for the norm, his ignorance would say that, had he understood, he would have desired to enter the Church. His desire would have been presumed, and his membership would exist without his knowledge.

Does this help?

 

[Lenten_ashes]

and back to the OP …

Are there any believers who are not part of the ekklesia ?

Are there any unbelievers included in the ekklesia?

Unbelievers, obviously not. But they may still attain salvation in ways known to God.

In regards to believers, That’s sort of relative and assuming you mean true believers. I thought Randy gave a sufficient answer. We live in a world with gray area and so detailed explanations are required. Well, outside the fundamentalists churches, anyway

Validly baptized non-Catholics are imperfectly joined to the Church.

Baptism of desire does not make you a official part of the Church body.

So officially, yes I suppose you can be a momentary “believer” w/o actually being part of the Church, YET. But unofficially, no, because true belief leads one to obedience to our Lord and subsequent baptism. ***And ***at some point he or she would become a part of the body of Christ.

So, in this hypothetical, _____(enter a name) desires baptism is a “believer”, but dies immediately like the thief of the cross. That person died a friend of God and went to purgatory or heaven(most likely purgatory) And so by no fault of their own, they bypassed the Church Militant and became part of the Church Suffering or Church Triumphant.

 

[SJacob7]

Why believers?

We are saved by grace…

Grace flows from Jesus Christ through Mary through the Church out to all mankind. Many are saved.

There are the ordinary means of salvation: the sacraments. This is the mode God has revealed to the world–this is His provision for us.

There are extraordinary means of salvation. As such–outside the ordinary–they are obscure, unknown to us. These means of salvation depend on individual exceptions to the provision, exceptions made by God in Trinitarian privacy. This area is understood to exist, but it is veiled, unrevealed.

The Catholic Church is the ordinary means of salvation for all mankind. Membership in it can be actual or potential. By potential I do not mean any less real.

Take the extreme case of a man brought up from infancy on a desert island by monkeys. Can he be saved? According to Romans, yes. If he is saved, it will have been because he is in some real sense a member of the Catholic Church, though he has never heard the name of Christ, let alone been anywhere near a baptismal font.

The gift of God’s life saves; when we live the gift, we are saved. The ordinary revealed way to do this is through the sacraments of the Church; extraordinary ways no doubt exist. All of the salvific ways will be about living the grace of incorporation, whether that membership is understood as such or not.

To insist upon a divine exception for oneself would be presumptuous, and it would not work if the subject knew the Catholic Church was the Body of Christ. If he were truly innocent in mistaking the exception for the norm, his ignorance would say that, had he understood, he would have desired to enter the Church. His desire would have been presumed, and his membership would exist without his knowledge.

Does this help?

You ask the question, why believers? Then state you are saved by grace. But you have left out a very important part in how we get saving grace. Please read Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God;

It’s by faith that we receive the grace of salvation.

 

[toaslan]

I didn’t put in the whole formula, but it is: we are saved by grace, through faith lived out in love. You can agree with that, why not?

 

[1Lord1Faith]

You ask the question, why believers? Then state you are saved by grace. But you have left out a very important part in how we get saving grace. Please read Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God;

It’s by faith that we receive the grace of salvation.

Did St. Paul receive grace through faith on the road to Demascus. You’ve got it backwards. Faith comes as a result of grace. The grace doesn’t come from anything (works) we did before we were given the grace, but it comes from God as a gift.

 

[JonNC]

Wow. Pretty awesome.

However, I would urge you to consider that while God reaches out to some in the powerful way that you describe, this is not universal. So, a word of caution: do not let pride cause you to look down on those whom God has called in a less dramatic fashion.

Normatively, people enter the Church through baptism, and therefore, it is true to say that they are Christians from that moment. This is NOT the world’s definition; this is the definition of the Church.

At the same time, I agree that it is necessary for us to go deeper as we mature.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Randy: You know if pressed; you will have to concede that it is possible to be baptized as an infant an be a lifelong God denying atheist until your last breath is gone.
It is possible to have been baptized NEVER to have believed in God.

Catholic theology allows for someone to be born again and be a lifelong atheist .

So does Lutheran theology. One has the free will to reject grace.

Jon

 

[alwayswill]

Catholic theology allows for someone to be born again and be a lifelong atheist .

So does Lutheran theology. One has the free will to reject grace.

Jon

I had no idea that was true about Lutheran theology.

 

[Randy_Carson]

No. I am saying, in response to Justa, that if we are under the authority of the Catholic Church, then we are (upper case C) Catholic.
But further, I would also contend that the Church Catholic is not only and exclusively in communion with the Bishop of Rome

Jon

I see it this way:

1. 
   *]Jesus promised to build one Church.
   *]The Church is the Body of Christ.
   *]Therefore, there is one Body of Christ.
   *]Jesus established Peter as the head of His one Church.
   *]The one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church established by Jesus and led by Peter began referring to itself as the Catholic Church possibly as early as before the death of the last living Apostle, John and certainly no later than the middle of the second century.
   *]Anyone who is a member of the Body of Christ must be in some communion with the head of the Catholic Church, the successor of Peter.
   *]
   
   Jimmy Akin stated it this way:
   
   1. 
      *]To be saved it is necessary to be a Christian.
      *]To be a Christian it is necessary to be a member of Christ’s Church.
      *]To be a member of Christ’s Church it is necessary to be a member of the Catholic Church.
      *]To be a member of the Catholic Church it is necessary to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
      *]Therefore, it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
      
      Taken from:
      
      The Necessity of Being Catholic
      by James Akin
      catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3447

 

[Church_Militant]

Randy: You know if pressed; you will have to concede that it is possible to be baptized as an infant an be a lifelong God denying atheist until your last breath is gone.
It is possible to have been baptized NEVER to have believed in God.

Which is precisely what the Bible teaches when Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ says that at judgement some who have called Him Lord Lord will hear, “depart from me …I never knew you.” It isn’t just Catholics who face this Biblical reality, but all believers. To seek to hang this on Catholics as an error is incorrect.

There is no such scriptural teaching as OSAS. It’s not there, period. Read the whole New Testament and look at notice passages like Matthew 25: 31-46 and Matthew 24:13.

I also suggest that you download this excellent Bible study by John Martignoni and be a good Berean and check it out carefully.
Once Saved, Always Saved?

Catholic theology allows for someone to be born again and be a lifelong atheist.

Because that is the Biblical teaching and not a new wind of doctrine of modern men from a mere 500 years ago.

So also does Christ when in Revelation 3:5 Christ Himself tells us "***[5] He who conquers shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life; I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.

***If then it is possible to have one’s name in the Book of Life (indicating they were believers) and then to have Our Lord blot out that name, (indicating a loss of salvation) then clearly OSAS is a false and dangerous doctrine.

You want assurance of salvation. Then read on.
Assurance of Salvation?
Born Again - The Bible Way
Are Catholics Born Again?
Once Saved, Always Saved?

 

[guanophore]

 **In the context of the New Testament:**

Does the word ekkleisa (ecclesia Latin) imply ALL believers?

Yes.

IOW: Is every believer part of the ekklesia

Apostolic teaching is that baptism is what makes us members of the ekklesia, so yes, all those who believe and are baptized become members.

and are there any unbelievers included in the ekklesia?

Baptism does leave an indelible mark on the soul, so those who have become heretics,schismatics and apostates are still, technically, joined to the Body of Christ.

from [newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm)

ecclesia is never used by the Apostles to denote the Jewish Church. The word as a technical expression had been transferred to the community of Christian believers

As signifying the Church, the word Ecclesia is used by Christian writers, sometimes in a wider, sometimes in a more restricted sense.
•It is employed to denote all who, from the beginning of the world, have **believed **in the one true God, and have been made His children by grace
•It may signify the whole body of the faithful, including not merely the members of the Church who are alive on earth but those, too, whether in heaven or in purgatory

Mindful that believers enter this grace in Baptism, yes.

from newadvent.org/cathen/10663a.htm
This truth, that the Church is the mystical body of Christ, all its members being guided and directed by Christ the head,

Is someone here denying this?

 from wiki

the Church Militant (Ecclesia Militans), comprising Christians on earth who are living; Christian militia, who struggle against sin, the devil and “…the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12).

Although I generally don’t support wiki as the most reliable source, this definition is consistent with Catholic teaching.

 From the CCC

790** Believers** who respond to God’s word and become members of Christ’s Body,
805 The Church is the Body of Christ. Through the Spirit and his action in the sacraments, above all the Eucharist, Christ, who once was dead and is now risen, establishes the community of believers as his own Body

Glad you are reading your Catechism.

 based on the above:

If I am a true believer: am I included in the Body Christ (aka the ekklesia)?
If I am a NOT true believer: am I included in the Body Christ (aka the ekklesia)?

The Apostles never used any such term as “true believer”. It is a modern evangelical invention. They spoke of Baptism as that which unites us to Christ and His Body. That being said, yes, all who are validly baptized are members of His One Body, the Church.

 

[guanophore]

so I If I am understanding you correctly:
You are stating that there can be be believers who are not part of the ekklesia:

There is only One Body. Either one is joined to it, or not.

There can be members that may not be visible as such, but there cannot be believers that are not part of the ekklesia.

Wow:
that certainly was a lot to read:

I was hoping for a “yes or no” answer

As the word ekkleisa is used in the NT:
Are there any believers who are not part of the ekklesia ?
Are there any unbelievers included in the ekklesia?
Maybe the questions cannot be answered with a " yes or no"

the “all who believe” and “the whole body of faithful” seem to indicate that all believers are part of the ekklesia and no unbelievers are part of the ekklesia:
Do you see it that way?

The Apostolic understanding is that "all who believe’ will be baptized.

You want a yes or no answer, but that is overly simplistic.

As Akin explained, there may be those who desire salvation but do not know Christ explicitly. Therefore, they would not be formal members of the body of Christ which comes through baptism.

If those, too, may be saved then it seems to me that there might be those who are technically “unbelievers” in this life but who will be members of the one body of Christ in the next.

Beyond this, I leave it in the hands of God.

I think it may be more accurate to say that they are believers and have been grafted into Christ, though they themselves may not realize it, and may not be visible as such in this life, but they are saved by grace, through faith anyway.

 

[jmcrae]

Whosoever imagined this definition of “church”. Is it Luther’s?

I only know it is a different definition than what existed prior to the Reformation, so I thought it was cooked up by one of the original Reformers.

I doubt it. The original “Reformers” had no concept of an “invisible Church.” They believed that they had defeated the Pope and usurped command of the Church, and that it now subsisted in themselves rather than in Rome - and certainly not in each other.

There were huge bloody battles over whose church was the real one. The concept of an “invisible church” was made necessary in order to stop the bloodshed and allow people to get on with their everyday lives - otherwise they would still be at it, even now. I’m not sure when it came about, but certainly not during the lifetimes of the Reformers themselves - their whole agenda was to take on the leadership of the whole visible Church on earth.

 

[Abu]

ECCLESIA. The unchanged Latin rendering of the Greek* ekklesia,* meaning assembly or community. The Bible uses the term in the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew *kahal *in both a secular and a religious sense. In the New Testament the word is used of the whole community of the believers in Christ (Matthew 16:18) and of a singly community of the faithful (Romans 6:5). The Catechism of Trent defines Ecclesia as the Church, which is the faithful of the whole world (I, 10,2). (Etym. Latin ecclesia, universal or an individual Church; from Greek ekklesia, assembly of people called together.)

ECCLESIA DISCENS. The learning Church. A term applied to all the faithful insofar as they are being taught by the successors of the Apostles. The basis for the expression is Christ’s commission to the eleven before the Ascension, “Go, therefore, make disciple of all nations” (Matthew 28:19).

ECCLESIA DOCENS. The teaching Church. A term applied to the hierarchy, that is, the Pope and the bishops in union with him, speaking in their divinely authorized capacity of teaching the faithful in matters pertaining to salvation and sanctification.
Modern Catholic Dictionary by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl

 

[guanophore]

Randy: You know if pressed; you will have to concede that it is possible to be baptized as an infant an be a lifelong God denying atheist until your last breath is gone.
It is possible to have been baptized NEVER to have believed in God.

Catholic theology allows for someone to be born again and be a lifelong atheist .

This is not “catholic theology” but the teaching of the Apostles. The Apostles understood that baptism replaced circumcision as the entrance rite into the New Covenant.

Just as with circumcision, when parents brought their children forward to participate in the community of faith, there is a commitment and understanding that the child will be raised in that faith. And just as a person cannot be “uncircumcised”, they cannot be unbaptized either. One could just as easily say that a Jew could be circumcised and be a lifelone God denying atheist.

Yes, of course it is possible to believe in God without baptism! Did you think the CC taught otherwise?

I didn’t go deeper:

I was a false Christian serving in a church.
Mere mental assent does not save.

Sounds a lot deeper to me! A spiritual awakening, inner transformation.

The sudden realization of more/different does not mean what was there before was “false”. Do you think Saul was a “false Jew” before he got on the road to Damascus?

No mental assent does not save, it is grace that saves. That grace operates in many different ways. Many people grow into their faith without any such powerful spiritual experience of transformation, just as I suppose many Jews grew into the covenant after circumcision.

I had no idea that was true about Lutheran theology.

Then CAF has fulfilled it’s mission today.

 

[JonNC]

I had no idea that was true about Lutheran theology.

Other than the T, we essentially reject all of Calvin’s TULIP.

Article XII: Of Repentance.

1] Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted 2] and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these 3] two parts: One is contrition, that is, 4] terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of 5] the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts 6] the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.

7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such 8] perfection in this life that they cannot sin.

Jon

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Other than the T, we essentially reject all of Calvin’s TULIP.

Jon

Catholics reject the “T” as well. You are a true Protestant.

 

[JonNC]

Catholics reject the “T” as well. You are a true Protestant.

Protestant and Catholic. Evangelical Catholic.

 

[PRmerger]

Protestant and Catholic. Evangelical Catholic.

No. You are a Catholic when you embrace all that the Vicar of Christ has professed and proclaimed for 2000 years.