The Indestructibility of the Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erick_Ybarra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the statements and comments.

I guess if we can toss out the issue of the popes being evil for a second.

I think the main question I have is what does Christ mean when he says “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 18). Is this referring to the infallibility of the papal teaching office ex cathedra? Or is this referring to the body of Christ consisting of human beings?
The “Church” is the body of believers in the New Covenant. Thus, evil will not overcome this new Temple.
 
If Christ is building his church, and this is the New covenant community, then doesn’t this imply all the members of the Church will be saved ?
 
For your consideration.
Pax Christi
During** a frustrating argument with a Roman Catholic cardinal, Napoleon Bonaparte **supposedly burst out: “Your eminence, are you not aware that I have the power to destroy the Catholic Church?” The cardinal, the anecdote goes, responded ruefully: “Your majesty, we, the Catholic clergy, have done our best to destroy the church for the last 1,800 years. We have not succeeded, and neither will you.”
peterpatau.com/2010/03/what-napoleon-couldnt-do-catholic.html
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
SECOND EDITION
1124 The Church’s faith precedes the faith of the believer who is invited to adhere to it. ****When the Church celebrates the sacraments, she confesses the faith received from the apostles - whence the ancient saying: lex orandi, lex credendi (or: legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi, according to Prosper of Aquitaine [5th cent.]).45 The law of prayer is the law of faith: the Church believes as she prays. Liturgy is a constitutive element of the holy and living Tradition.46
1128 This is the meaning of the Church’s affirmation49 that the sacraments act ex opere operato (literally: “by the very fact of the action’s being performed”), i.e., by virtue of the saving work of Christ, accomplished once for all. It follows that "the sacrament is not wrought by the righteousness of either the celebrant or the recipient, but by the power of God."50 From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister. Nevertheless, the fruits of the sacraments also depend on the disposition of the one who receives them.
 
If Christ is building his church, and this is the New covenant community, then doesn’t this imply all the members of the Church will be saved ?
Yes, those believers in the New Covenant who persevere to the end (leaving aside predestination for the sake of this discussion).
 
thanks everyone.

Ive been reading a book on the Papacy by J Michael miller CSB The Shepherd and the Rock. The book is very convincing in the historical development of the papacy being something to which all the faithful were ascribing.

However he does admit that the ministry peter received and the modern papal office are distinguished by historical development.
 
Thank you! You have really made me dig after reading your threads. I am more convinced than before. Thanks and I hope you find what you are looking for Erick.

-Frank
 
Thanks for the statements and comments.

I guess if we can toss out the issue of the popes being evil for a second.

I think the main question I have is what does Christ mean when he says “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 18). Is this referring to the infallibility of the papal teaching office ex cathedra? Or is this referring to the body of Christ consisting of human beings?
Jewish belief at the time of Jesus was that the Temple was the center of the universe, where God dwelt with man, and where heaven and earth met.

The rock upon which the Temple was built was believed to cap off a long shaft which led down to The Pit or Sheol, the dark abode of the dead. The Temple itself, the capstone upon which it was built, and God who dwelled there was literally the “Gate of the netherworld” which prevented darkness and death from entering creation from Sheol.

We can hear clear echos of this belief in the Book of Revelation.

Then the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. It was given the key for the passage to the abyss. It opened the passage to the abyss, and smoke came up out of the passage like smoke from a huge furnace. The sun and the air were darkened by the smoke from the passage. (Revelation 9:1-2)

The star fallen from heaven early in Revelation is the fallen angel, Lucifer, who opens the passage to the abyss with a key and lets darkness, sin and death enter creation.

*Then I saw an angel come down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the abyss and a heavy chain. He seized the dragon, the ancient serpent, which is the Devil or Satan, and tied it up for a thousand years and threw it into the abyss, which he locked over it and sealed, so that it could no longer lead the nations astray until the thousand years are completed. (Revelation 20:1-3) *

Later in Revelation an angel comes down from heaven with a key, ties up Satan, throws him into the pit and locks it up. The angel locks the gates to the netherworld with a key, and the nations can no longer be into deception and death. Peter was given that key, and with it he is able to lock the gates of the netherworld so that sin and death will not enter creation.

Who is the angel? I can’t say. Peter? The Church? The Gospels? The Apostles? The sacraments? I don’t know. But the angel, the key and the locking of the gates is clear.

Jews would have understood what Jesus was talking about and what John was writing about because they understood what the Temple was, where it was built, and why. They understood the theology of the Temple while we don’t.

-Tim-
 
Thanks for the statements and comments.

I guess if we can toss out the issue of the popes being evil for a second.

I think the main question I have is what does Christ mean when he says “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 18). Is this referring to the infallibility of the papal teaching office ex cathedra? Or is this referring to the body of Christ consisting of human beings?
This quote (from Mt 16 not 18) refers to the ekklesia as a whole - The assembly, the community. So in this sense parts of the assembly or community might fall away (not be saved) but the community as a whole survive.

But a community does not simply consist of a random collection of persons. They are brought together by some commonality. In this case it is Christ who draws them together and charges them to maintain community with each other. He taught them and gave commandments to Love one another.
Jesus also prayed that we be one - as He and the Father are one:
John 17:20-21
20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me

How much more united can we hope for than this…The Epistles continue this call to unity with repeated exhortations.
Rom 15:5-6
5 May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, 6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Cor 1:10
I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

2 Cor 13:11
Finally, brothers, rejoice. Aim for restoration, comfort one another, agree with one another, live in peace; and the God of love and peace will be with you.

Php 1:27
Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel,

1 Pet 3:8
Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind.
Can we lay claim to this biblical kind of unity when different groups teach conflicting doctrines?
Can the Holy Spirit teach that the Lord’s supper is both the real presence AND only symbolic?

Christ’s community needs a way to resolve these matters of conflict. Christ provided for this. The Holy Scriptures not only give us instruction but a demonstration of it in action.
The Papal office is but one part of this apparatus that has developed from simple beginnings.
The RC and the EO have used these methods of governance and council to good effect ( the great Schism being the notable failure). Great pressure has been brought at times to change - to go against ancient truths - to “get with the times” - but the Church has resisted and clung to the Gospel.

Can’t tell if I’ve answered your question or gotten off topic…Sorry…Hope some of this might help.

Peace
James
 
I came across this website which claims that Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, Ambrose, John Chrysostom, Augustine, and others did not believe in a papacy…

I just want to excercise how to argue the protestant side, but when I search something, I come across things like this. How can we respond?

lightshinesindarkness.com/papacy_early_church.htm
 
I came across this website which claims that Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, Ambrose, John Chrysostom, Augustine, and others did not believe in a papacy…

I just want to excercise how to argue the protestant side, but when I search something, I come across things like this. How can we respond?

lightshinesindarkness.com/papacy_early_church.htm
That’s a Calvinist website. Calvinists are notoriously anti-Catholic. The Presbyterian statement of faith used to say that the Pope was the Anti-Christ.

Without mentioning specific names, at least one of the sources cited as “Catholic” is questionable. The quote from Augustine about the “Rock” is wildly out of context.

You have to study the lives of the Early Church Fathers and saints. They were all obedient to the Church. They were children of the Church. They weren’t rebels or lone-rangers. We also have to read what they say, not what websites say they say, and certainly not what Calvinist websites say they say.

-Tim-
 
Ah, hypocrisy. Always a tough one to deal with.

The Apostles dealt with this in Jesus’ time, and we are still dealing with it today. I doubt the Church will ever be free of it - we are, after all, a Church of both saints and sinners. Jesus told us that the wheat and tares would grow together in the Kingdom until the final days.

But Jesus also told us that we must accept the authority of the Church, even if the leaders of the Church were wicked:
👍
 
(I felt this helped answer the original question, so this is my extension to the conversation. Sourced from Catholi Enecyclopieda)

The promise is made to the corporate body.

Individual Churches may become corrupt in morals, may fall into heresy, may even apostatize.

The Church can never undergo any constitutional change which will make it, as a social organism, something different from what it was originally. It can never become corrupt in faith or in morals; nor can it ever lose the Apostolic hierarchy, or the sacraments through which Christ communicates grace to men. The gift of indefectibility is expressly promised to the Church by Christ, in the words in which He declares that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The various bodies that have left the Church naturally deny its indefectibility. Their plea for separation rests in each case on the supposed fact that the main body of Christians has fallen so far from primitive truth, or from the purity of Christian morals, that the formation of a separate organization is not only desirable but necessary.
 
How do Catholics understand Jesus’ statement “I will build my Church and the gates of hell with not prevail against it” (Matthew 16). What is this Church?
As a Catholic, I personally validate this statement through the following method:
The Catholic Church will forever be the owner of the means to fulfill the pinnacle of living.

Here is more details:
Given the question: How does a Creator create an ever-lasting society of a limitless number of true friends, in which the Creator gets to participate as a friend, and the Creator initially exists in absolute solitude?
The rules each friend of the heavenly society must freely subject him/herself to living in unity with is the Greatest Commandment.
The pinnacle means of living in the earthly society is the Greatest Commandment in unity with the Sacraments of Catholicism.
The Story of events from the beginning of Creation until the means to sustain this purpose has been fulfilled is the Holy Bible.
The Life of the Creator is the Nicene Creed.
Very important details regarding the solution are the Catechisms and Doctrines of the Catholic Church.
How can we reconcile this with the Catholic claim that they hand around the neck of Peter’s successor alone?
I hope that I can get through this difficulty.
Please consider the following in hopes of reconciling the difficulty.

If every Pope were perfect without stumble, it would be easier for Jesus to remain eternally alive on earth. The question should become why didn’t He? The answer is because it would sacrifice the purpose for creation.
 
Why should the People be separate from the office?

The People will not be prevailed against, as long as they are partaking in the divine nature, Through Him, with Him, In Him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit.

The Church Militant is physical and divine in her office, which all of her members take part, or participate in.

So Yes the people wont be prevailed against, as long as they Participate in, whereas the Church Militant will not be prevailed against as long as there are people. 😉

Christ knew there would always be, both people, and office,🙂 partaking in His divine Nature
 
From the CCC
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P28.HTM

I dont think anyone is assured entry into heaven. What would be the point of striving to be good if we already have a guarantee?
I affirm “I dont think anyone is assured entry into heaven.” This is the Faith.

What would be the point of striving to be good if we already have a guarantee?
I dont think it is a good supporting argument…

God Bless.
Kentcara2003(SSCC 3rd Order)
 
Yes, those believers in the New Covenant who persevere to the end (leaving aside predestination for the sake of this discussion).
I think we got to clarify this, brother as he is searching…

No, NOT ALL THE BELIEVERS WILL BE SAVED.
Only those who persevere to the end and adhere to the teachings of the Church as SHE TEACHES, TO THE MEASURE SHE TEACHES and DIE IN THE STATE OF GRACE AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH.

It is tough, BUT WE HAVE THE FULLNESS OF TRUTH AND THE SACRAMENTS TO HELP US ON THE WAY.

When we sin, MEA CUPA, MEA CUPA MEA MAXIMA CULPA…and go to the tribunal of Confession…I feel if we have the audacity to sin, let us have the humility to admit it and LIVE IN THE TRUTH OF CHRIST WHICH LIBERATES.

We need Christ as SAVIOUR, LORD AND KING.
We need His Church to experience the fullness of the LIFE HE IS OFFERING, THE GRACE OF GOD WHICH WILL BE TRANSLATED INTO THE LIFE OF ETERNAL COMMUNION WITH THE VISION OF GOD WHO IS INFINITE LOVE AND TRUTH FOR ALL ETERNITY…A JOY WHICH IS BEYOND OUR IMAGINATION…THAT IS WHAT WE ARE STRIVING FOR…IT IS WORTH IT…

If a Catholic feels he can pick and choose important choices like to support abortion, contraception, homosexuality etc. in this life but at the end of his life he realises his folly and repents and confesses, he will be saved. BUT THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER HE IS SAVED OR NOT (IF HE REPENTS AND GOES TO CONFESSION, THE POWER OF THE SACRAMENT WILL CONVERT EVEN HIS NOT SO PERFECT CONTRITION LIKE THE FEAR OF HELL, TO AN ACT OF CONTRITION…HE WILL BE SAVED…)
BUT HOW MUCH OF HEAVEN WILL HE GET??

The reason why we are here on earth is to grow in the love and knowledge of God and the end of our lives marks the end of growth…
I always asks myself, miserable as I am, how beautiful God must be, an infinite being of Beauty and Love …and my vision of that will be limited by my following the footsteps of my Saviour…therefore…
"Lord, make us know the shortness of our life, that we may gain wisdom of heart.“Psalm
May we not complain as St Augustine did,“Late have I known you, late have I known you.O God, Ever Ancient Ever New.” (a famous paraphrase of his.”)…not that we can ever compare to his stature, just the regret that surely must be ours who are of lesser virtue?

You and yours in my prayers
Kentcara2003(3rd Order SSCC)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top