The Universal Church

[lanman87]

As far as I can tell (based on 90% of the Baptist brothers and sisters that I am friends with), that bit of legalism is only binding within the physical boundaries of the church property…

Yes, it is a teaching that has went by the wayside in the past 20 years or so. There are still a few old school preachers/churches who are hard core prohibitionist but for the most part it is hardly ever mentioned anymore and Baptist can now acknowledge each other at the liquor store.

 

[TULIPed]

Finally Calvinists and Armenians can at least argue vehemently about Romans 9 over a beer at the pub. So much more civilized!

 

[SyCarl]

In the bread of life discourse Jesus says several things, one of which seems to be generally ignored.

I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.
(Joh 6:51-54 DRB)

My understanding of the Catholic view is that anyone who receives the Eucharist in a Catholic Church eats Jesus’ flesh and drinks his blood even they receive it illicitly. If Jesus is speaking literally here then receiving the Eucharist is not only necessary but it is also sufficient. He places no condition on his statements.

With respect to Church unity Jesus says:

And now I am not in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name whom thou hast given me: that they may be one, as we also are.

(Joh 17:11 DRB)

How are the Father and Jesus one? They are one God in three persons. I believe that in the same say the universal church can be one in a number of denominations. Just as Father, Jesus and Holy Spirit are one God, I believe that that Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians etc. can all be one Church.

 

[De_Maria]

I voluntarily submit to my local church just as you voluntarily submit to the Catholic church.

Not true.

If the Catholic Church says to me, “you’re wrong.” I will submit to their authority, whether I understand it or not.

Whereas, I dare to say that you would not submit to your local church authority if you looked at Scripture and disagreed with their interpretation.

Am I right?

You see, I believe that Jesus Christ established the Catholic Church and that the Catholic Church is the Teacher of all which Christ commanded. Therefore, when I submit to the Catholic Church, I submit to Jesus Christ.

However, I don’t think my local church is anything more than God’s People gathering together to worship and serve Christ. I believe the Methodist church down the street is also God’s people gathered to worship and serve Christ. And the Assembly of God on the other side of town is God’s people gathered to worship and serve Christ. Whatever divisions we have are overcome by the Grace of God and the Holy Spirit.

Where does Scripture say that? Here’s what I see in Scripture:

Romans 16:17Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Show me where Scripture says that divisions are welcome and that Christ is divided?

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

I believe the teachings of Christ and the Apostles are the doctrines that we must continue in.

So do I. But I believe these are passed down by the Church. But you believe it is passed down by the Scripture alone, even though you see the hundreds if not thousands of different and conflicting interpretations that doctrine generates.

I believe most all of American Evangelical churches hold to the teachings of the Apostles in some form or fashion.

I don’t. I can quote many verses which the American Evangelical societies, contradict.

But I also believe American Evangelicalism has, in some cases, become like the Jews and created man made traditions that they elevate to “dogmatic” or at least as a necessary status. (For instance, my Baptist teaching of no alcoholic beverages ever). The difference is the Baptist (who doesn’t drink) will still fellowship with the Methodist (who has no such prohibition). Of course, I believe the same thing about the Catholic church, even more so.

And you, conveniently, do not count yourself amongst them. Because, and I don’t mean this as an insult, but you and all Protestants, generate your own truths.

The New Testament describes local churches we are oversaw by elders/bishops/presybters and each church is independent from the others, in the sense that members are only subject to their local elders.

Where does Scripture say this?

There is no church wide hierarchy where one bishop is over multiple churches. That was a later development. A practical development but nevertheless it was not how the first century church was organized.

Then why did they hold a Council in Acts 15?

Nobody denies (at least non I’m aware of) that God calls and the church affirms some people to be leaders (elders, pastors, presbyters, bishops) of the local church.

But you and all Protestants of which I’m aware, will not submit to them when your opinion differs on theological matters. Correct me if I’m wrong.

 

[De_Maria]

You’re welcome. Our Saints have been brewing beer for centuries.

Arnulf of Oudenburg

St. Arnold of Soissons is often depicted with a bishop’s mitre and a mash rake. Arnold (Arnoul) of Soissons or Arnold or Arnulf of Oudenburg (ca 1040–1087) is a saint of the Roman Catholic Church, the patron saint of hop-pickers and Belgian brewers .

[

Arnold of Soissons - Wikipedia​

](Arnold of Soissons - Wikipedia)

 

[lanman87]

If the Catholic Church says to me, “you’re wrong.” I will submit to their authority, whether I understand it or not.

But that is your choice to do so. Nobody is threatening to burn you at the stake if you don’t submit. Which hasn’t always been the case.

Whereas, I dare to say that you would not submit to your local church authority if you looked at Scripture and disagreed with their interpretation.

It depends. If they suddenly said “Jesus isn’t Lord” or “Sex isn’t just between a husband and wife” then I would no longer submit. I suspect if a Pope infallibly declared the same things then you would not submit to the Catholic church any longer.

Romans 16:17Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Show me where Scripture says that divisions are welcome and that Christ is divided?

They don’t say division are welcome and I didn’t claim that they are. I just believe our common faith unites us more than our disagreements or traditions separate us.

 

[lanman87]

So do I. But I believe these are passed down by the Church.

And I believe the Catholic church has added to the deposit of faith that was given by Christ and the Apostles and now teach many traditions of men.

And you, conveniently, do not count yourself amongst them.

Sure I do. I gave an example of how I believe the tradition I was raised in has raised something to be necessary.

Where does Scripture say this?

It shows us by example. Can you show me where one bishop was over a bunch of local churches?

Then why did they hold a Council in Acts 15?

The council in Acts 15 was of apostles and elders. James presided over the council as his local church was host and guided the council decisions that was accepted by the council.

But you and all Protestants of which I’m aware, will not submit to them when your opinion differs on theological matters. Correct me if I’m wrong.

This is not unique to Protestant churches. The Old Catholic’s split from the Catholic church after Vatican I. Today sedevanctist claim to be the true Catholic church since Vatican II. As I said, if the Pope or Catholic church declared something to be okay that has always been called a sin or changed the definition of “Who Christ is” then my guess is you would no longer be Catholic, or maybe you would be part of a splinter group that claims to be the “True Catholic Church”.

Each of us have the responsibility to follow God and not men, to the best of our ability and understanding as we pray and seek God.

 

[lanman87]

I don’t. I can quote many verses which the American Evangelical societies, contradict.

The difference is that we don’t believe we saved because of what we believe about baptism, predestination, works, free will, original sin, the Lord’s Supper, sacraments or ordinances, or church government, or speaking in tongues and so forth. We believe we are saved because of what we believe about Jesus. We in the evangelical community all believe the same thing about Jesus, most of us believe the same things about the Lord’s Supper and baptism.

We take versus like 1 John 4:15 to heart. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

 

[ziapueblo]

The difference is that we don’t believe we saved because of what we believe about baptism, predestination, works, free will, original sin, the Lord’s Supper, sacraments or ordinances, or church government, or speaking in tongues and so forth.

I would say, that speaking about salvation but no mention of the sacraments, is not apostolic Christianity.

15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

And so does apostolic Christianity.

ZP

 

[Lenten_ashes]

How do you identify who those people are? Cause your benchmark for that given in reply to Steve could also describe Mormons who teach ridiculous doctrines.

 

[mcq72]

I would say, that speaking about salvation but no mention of the sacraments, is not apostolic Christianity.

Here we go…but seems like the term salvation needs qualification between, past ,present and future, between justification, sanctification, and glorification.

But who would deny that a spiritual encounter with the Living Christ thru the gospel word and subsequent implantation of His faith by grace saves us into new birth, justifies us. Even there we quibble about pre and post baptismal birth.

Many people experience non institutional saving, that is before any sacraments.

I would say, that speaking about salvation but no mention of the sacraments, is not apostolic Christianity.

Well, baptism and communion are mentioned twice, and sacraments are also mentioned, just from a different perspective, which to me seems more apostolic.

The claim that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church says a lot…like no mention of Jesus Christ in that statement…such proprietary, sectarian view to me is unapostolic, in a day when we are way past Christological issues, that were part basis for statement in first place.( minus the word Catholic", that Cyprian did not use)

 

[De_Maria]

Sure I do. I gave an example of how I believe the tradition I was raised in has raised something to be necessary.

With which you disagree and you accept it anyway?

It shows us by example.

Where?

Can you show me where one bishop was over a bunch of local churches?

Yes. Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches…

St John the Apostle is the Bishop of these Churches.

The council in Acts 15 was of apostles and elders. James presided over the council as his local church was host and guided the council decisions that was accepted by the council.

It was St. Peter whose guidance they followed:

Acts 15:13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: 14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

Simeon, is of course, St. Peter, who had spoken previously.

And they guidance that they agreed to give out was not in Jerusalem, but in Galatia.

This is not unique to Protestant churches.

True.

The Old Catholic’s split from the Catholic church after Vatican I.

Basically, becoming new protestants who established their own religion in opposition to the Church which Jesus established.

Today sedevanctist claim to be the true Catholic church since Vatican II. As I said, if the Pope or Catholic church declared something to be okay that has always been called a sin or changed the definition of “Who Christ is” then my guess is you would no longer be Catholic, or maybe you would be part of a splinter group that claims to be the “True Catholic Church”.

But their rebellion does not justify yours. It just means that they, like you, refuse to obey the Scripture which commands you to submit to the Church.

Each of us have the responsibility to follow God and not men, to the best of our ability and understanding as we pray and seek God.

True. But Scripture does not advise you to disobey the Church.

There is absolute Truth which is outside of us. Protestants and those who deny the Catholic Church, make up their own truth. They refuse to submit to the Truth which Jesus Christ revealed and passed down, through His Church.

 

[De_Maria]

The difference is that we don’t believe we saved because of what we believe about baptism, predestination, works, free will, original sin, the Lord’s Supper, sacraments or ordinances, or church government, or speaking in tongues and so forth. We believe we are saved because of what we believe about Jesus.

Yes. But much of what you believe about Jesus, is false. For example. You believe that Jesus did it all and you have no part in your salvation. That is not true. Jesus Himself says,

Luke 9:23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

We in the evangelical community all believe the same thing about Jesus,

And again, much of what you believe, is false. You believe that Jesus died on the Cross so that you wouldn’t have to suffer or do anything else. But Scripture says:

1 Peter 2:21For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

most of us believe the same things about the Lord’s Supper and baptism.

You believe the same errors. You deny that Baptism is necessary. And you deny that Jesus is truly present in the Lord’s Supper.

We take versus like 1 John 4:15 to heart. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

And you fail to recognize that this confession is made during the rite of Baptism because you have discarded the Traditions that Our Lord commanded His Church to Teach and you to obey.

 

[De_Maria]

But that is your choice to do so.

It is also yours.

Nobody is threatening to burn you at the stake if you don’t submit.

Who is threatening to burn you?

Which hasn’t always been the case.

Many anti-Catholics make this claim. Here’s what I say. God gave the Church the power over life and death as is clearly shown in Scripture:

Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. 5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things. 6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.

And if the Church were to declare that I must die, I pray that I have the courage to accept the decree of Jesus Christ speaking through His Church.

But, the Church has never burned anyone at the stake. What Catholics have done in spite of Catholic Teaching, is not a blemish on the Church, but on their own murderous soul.

It depends. If they suddenly said “Jesus isn’t Lord” or “Sex isn’t just between a husband and wife” then I would no longer submit. I suspect if a Pope infallibly declared the same things then you would not submit to the Catholic church any longer.

The Pope is protected against error by the Holy Spirit. It can’t happen. So says Jesus.

Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

They don’t say division are welcome and I didn’t claim that they are. I just believe our common faith unites us more than our disagreements or traditions separate us.

So, basically, you’re saying that you turn a blind eye to the divisions in order to embrace your doctrine of men and deny the Word of God. Because there are certainly divisions and you admit as much when you say, “our disagreements or traditions separate us”.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Would you agree, given how Jesus said it, That this is a do this or else command He gives us, and not some chummy feeling or suggestion?

Agree on the command, disagree on the interpretation. My guess is we’ll continue to agree to disagree on the manner in which we get right with Him - or at least parts thereof.

As for me, I want assurance. No guessing.

TULIPed:

I bet though (we’re blessed to be peacemakers, no?) we would agree much more on the ways in which he told us to get right with each other.

For me,

peacemaking begins 1st and foremost with the vertical reality, over and above everything else. THEN after that, the horizontal comes in.

If we don’t 1st obey everything God commands of us, particularly the non negotiables, then everything including the horizontal, falls apart anyway,

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

You describe some big IF’s

IF one is filled with the HS. What’s your benchmark for that?

IF one is a faithful follower of Christ . What’s your definition of that?

IF those assemblies are His Church. How do you decide that?

It is not my benchmark. I’m not the one who decides who is a Spirit filled, faithful follower of Christ.

That is up to each individual to understand their spiritual state for themselves as they are convicted and shaped by the Spirit. 2 Corinthians 13:5, Romans 8:16, Philippians 2:12

If we are private interpreters of our own spiritual welfare and ultimate final direction,

then

why did Jesus establish His Church, and His sacraments, etc for our salvation?

why did Jesus put the stipulation all must be in perfect union with His Church?

why did the HS inspire Paul to put a terrible consequence on those who divide from Our Lord’s Church?

and on and on I could go.

lanman87:

However, the Bible does give several traits or evidence of true followers/believers of Christ.

1. They seek to abstain from sin and are convicted and repent of sinful actions
2. They love God and love others and “love their brother”
3. They pray both for themselves and for others
4. They gather and worship
5. They testify the Jesus is the Christ, the Saviour of the world
6. They give and support ministries and missions
7. They seek to glorify God in everything
8. They get baptized
9. They take the Lord’s Supper
10. Christ is their treasure
11. They confess their sins to one another
12. They bear each others burdens

Re: your points, just a few thoughts

Once someone is knowledgeable of the truth,

1. and is in division from The Church, that is a huge sin. Repent means to end one’s division… true?
2. can one say they love God and not obey the non negotiables Jesus gave us?
3. If one prays while in mortal sin, and they won’t fix that condition, is their prayer successful?
4. If they don’t celebrate the Eucharist when they meet, are they doing what God requires?
5. If they don’t do what Jesus commands of them, what then are they testifying to?
6. love / obedience to God is FIRST, THEN love of neighbor as oneself.
7. If that is true, then they won’t be in division from His Church…true?
8. Baptism is a beginning.
9. The Eucharist is a requirement, AND it requires a valid priesthood, to be true.
10. If so, they will obey His requirements…true?
11. As in one confesses to a validly ordained priest. A sacrament Jesus established HERE
12. true

lanman87:

I believe the Lord’s Supper is [snip for space]

this isn’t up for Private interpretation.

 

[steve-b]

De_Maria:

I don’t. I can quote many verses which the American Evangelical societies, contradict.

*We take versus like 1 John 4:15 to heart. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

AND lanman87,

confesses, is NOT just a "said" confession. Any more than a "said" faith according to James does anything. Confession, like faith, requires action.

Whoever confesses ὁμολογήσῃ that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God

One aligns them self with, assents to, …

 

[mcq72]

Yes. Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches …

St John the Apostle is the Bishop of these Churches.

Yes, he was the pope…? last apostle with highest authority.

Apostle, he was, overseeing the churches he helped found i think.

 

[mcq72]

this isn’t up for Private interpretation.(Lord’s Supper)

I think the Orthodox interpret less privately than CC…they dont overdefine, which can be seen as “private”.