What Is Your Authority?

[Bamm]

The Spirit guides the Church to prevent it from teaching falsehood. He does not prevent its members from sinning.

Petergee,

The members are The Church.

Also, you asked me something about the differences between the Catholic churches and when I have time I will find the link to information presented to explain the differences between the American Roman Catholic churches and the other Roman Catholic churches in the world. That would probably be the easiest thing to do.

Bamm

 

[po18guy]

Christ’s peace is the source of the worlds problems? Huh? I kid, I kid. That’s just the first impression I got when I read this.

The quote was about the molestation scandals in the church. I like to look at the big picture. Trace problems back to their source and you always find the influence of the evil one.

Christ’s peace.

 

[clpage86]

My point was that for Christians to be unified, they need to keep in mind that God/Christ moves in wonderous ways and even though someone doesn’t “belong” to “our” group, doesn’t mean they do not have the blessing and the backing of the Holy Trinity.

The problem is that there are “groups,” that we are not unified! If superficially we all claim to love Christ and want to serve him, but at the end of the day we’re in our respective groups warning our members not to accept the teaching of some other group since they are the embodiment of the anti-christ, then we are not unified! In his epistle to the Ephesians, Paul writes (i.e. God says) that there is “one faith.” One faith does not mean a few core beliefs and some disputed points. It means ONE!

I think (I hope) that we can all agree that the Apostles had it right, and we can all hope that the first generation of disciples they made were correct too. Let us all study what the Early Fathers or the first Christians or the Early Church believed. Perhaps we should read the Didache, since the Apostles wrote that. If at least the Apostles were “guided into all truth,” then it must be true. Right?

 

[clpage86]

That’s a name which was invented by others in the 17th century.

I assume you mean the “Roman” part? We’ve practically always been known as the Catholic Church.

 

[agangbern]

Catholics make the claim that the Bible is “not sufficient” only to bolster their doctrines on “Tradition;” but in doing so; they have never proven in all of their “apologetics” how that the Bible allegedly falls short in giving the essential information needed for “salvation.”

Can the bible save? I would say NO. It is Jesus who saves. It is a person who is both God and Man who is needed for salvation. The Bible is God’s word, yes. But in that bible Jesus said, “You searched the Scriptures, because in them you think that you have everlasting life. And it is they that bear witness to me, yet you are not willing to come to me that you may have life.” How could we come to you Lord when we are stuck to the Bible and we think it is the bible that would save us?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Take for example the recent problems that the Roman Catholic Church has had. Clearly, the men involved were not being guided by the Spirit when they performed their misdeeds. THEY did the contridicting not the Holy Spirit. Yet, one would assume that at some point they had been touched by the Holy Spirit or the Roman Catholic Church would not have ordained them as priests.

That’s why it’s important to remember how Christ stuck with Peter with all his faults. Despite that, Peter never taught in error. Neither has the Catholic Church.

Curious, what made you conclude that the “Church” isn’t the Catholic Church anyway?

 

[NotWorthy]

That’s why it’s important to remember how Christ stuck with Peter with all his faults. Despite that, Peter never taught in error. Neither has the Catholic Church.

Curious, what made you conclude that the “Church” isn’t the Catholic Church anyway?

Yes, if you study the OT regarding God’s relationship with Israel. He described Israel as a harlot. He wasn’t describing individuals, but the entity of Israel. Likewise, He prophecied that He would have a bride, and Jesus talks in the NT of the King and His bride. They would be loyal to each other, not the harlot that Israel was in the OT.

The Bride has to be an entity and not people, for people have proven time and time again to be the harlot that Israel was in the OT. But the Church, despite having people in her that are harlots, has remained the Bride that Christ taught about.

 

[Petergee]

Petergee,

The members are The Church.

Also, you asked me something about the differences between the Catholic churches and when I have time I will find the link to information presented to explain the differences between the American Roman Catholic churches and the other Roman Catholic churches in the world. That would probably be the easiest thing to do.

Bamm

The so-called “American Catholic Church in the United States” has absolutely no connexion to the Catholic Church and is in communion with the Anglicans, as the article you PM’d me ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Catholic_Church_in_the_United_States )makes perfectly clear. But I guess you know that, otherwise you would have linked it in public. If you are interested in finding the truth, the first step is to be honest in your dealings with others.

There are no doctrinal differences or “denominations” within the Catholic Church. Your allegation is false.

 

[Bamm]

That’s why it’s important to remember how Christ stuck with Peter with all his faults. Despite that, Peter never taught in error. Neither has the Catholic Church.

Curious, what made you conclude that the “Church” isn’t the Catholic Church anyway?

You and others speak of the original 12 apostles having the truth. I can agree with that adding that we can read and know that they had their differences. But lets set that aside.

What Bible verse, letter, or other document that one of these original 12 men authored uses “Catholic” to name or identify Christ’s Church?

In other words, I am curious as to what made you conclude that the “Church” is the Catholic Church?

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

You and others speak of the original 12 apostles having the truth. I can agree with that adding that we can read and know that they had their differences. But lets set that aside.

What Bible verse, letter, or other document that one of these original 12 men authored uses “Catholic” to name or identify Christ’s Church?

In other words, I am curious as to what made you conclude that the “Church” is the Catholic Church?

Bamm

Did those Apostles leave people behind to continue the teachings that they started? We see Paul talk about this to Tim. We can trace these ordained priests all the way to today.

For instance, Ignatius, who is the first known documented user of the term “Catholic Church” (note that he didn’t have to explain what he meant by the term, which seems to imply that the phrase had already been in use) was a disciple of John and Peter. Ireneaus, in the 180’s AD, was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John.

 

[Bamm]

The so-called “American Catholic Church in the United States” has absolutely no connexion to the Catholic Church and is in communion with the Anglicans, as the article you PM’d me ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Catholic_Church_in_the_United_States )makes perfectly clear. But I guess you know that, otherwise you would have linked it in public. If you are interested in finding the truth, the first step is to be honest in your dealings with others.

There are no doctrinal differences or “denominations” within the Catholic Church. Your allegation is false.

Petergee,

I have nothing to hide. I am here to learn, but I won’t take someone’s word for anything just because they belong to one group or another.

I post my private message in which I told you that I am new at this forum and am learning how to get around and that I could not find your post. I know how to find it now. You could have been honest and just told me how to find the right spot to post in public forum and I would have. None the less, here it is:

---

Petergee,

Hello. I have not been able to find those articles that I read that explained some of the differences between the Catholic churches. The information was part of the articles, so a little harder to find. I will post the link to Wikipedia that explains some of what I was talking about.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America…_United_States

I don’t know how to make it live. I am new and do not know as yet how everything works.

Well, I just learned something when I previewed my message. The link activates automatically. Cool.

I apologize as well for not being able to find the original post where you asked the question, so I could post this message there.

I will keep in mind that info and get it to you when I find it because I do believe that the articles either came from the Vatican or were at least written by a Bishop, priest or someone that belonged to the Roman Catholic Church which would be a better source than Wikipedia.

Bamm

---

Your original question was:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamm
Yes, I am very much aware that there are differences between Catholic Churches. The same as there are differences between Protestant ones.

Really? Name one doctrinal difference between any two “Catholic Churches”.

---

Then I asked you if you wanted Biblical or tribunal differences and you said any difference. So, I gave you that website which speaks of differences. Now you tell me that the church mentioned is not a Catholic Church even though it calls itself “Catholic” in the title.

Hmmm, I guess you better clarify to me which Catholic Churches you consider Catholic because common sense tells me if the name of the church has “Catholic” in its name it is a “Catholic” church.

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

---

Then I asked you if you wanted Biblical or tribunal differences and you said any difference. So, I gave you that website which speaks of differences. Now you tell me that the church mentioned is not a Catholic Church even though it calls itself “Catholic” in the title.

Hmmm, I guess you better clarify to me which Catholic Churches you consider Catholic because common sense tells me if the name of the church has “Catholic” in its name it is a “Catholic” church.

Bamm

You are kidding aren’t you? Well, I take that back. It can be misleading to other Christians.

There are several churches that claim that they are the Catholic Church, and they will tell you that they broke off from the Catholic Church. We even have a guy in Missouri that claims to be the Pope since Pope Paul got rid of the required Latin Mass. Sadly, these people claim to be the true Church, just as our brothers at the Church of Christ claim that they are the ones that descended from the Christian Church found in Acts (They were persecuted by the bastardized Catholic Church that Constantine founded and were forced underground for the next 1300 years - so much for “you are the light of the world”).

 

[Bamm]

Petergee and others,

Here is one of the articles I mentioned. The title is: “Cardinals Meet Vatican Officials on Mass Texts: Can Rome Resist Pressure for Language Changes?”

I am assuming since this document came out of the Vatican, it would be accepted as speaking about “Catholic” churches. NOTE: They are talking about English-speaking Catholics.

adoremus.org/297-CardsVat.html

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

Bamm, here’s your first clue about our friends at the “American Catholic Church”

This church belongs to the family of the Old Catholic churches, from which it derives its claim to apostolic succession. It is in consortium with many other Old Catholic and Anglican/Episcopalian Churches. Founded by Reverend Lawrence J. Harms DD on June 13, 1999, the church is based in Frederick, Maryland. Harms leads the church, and holds the title of Presiding Archbishop.

This guy had a problem with the Catholic teaching and broke away, just as the Lutherans did years ago. The problem is, he kept the name Catholic. He, my good friend, is NOT Catholic.

And let’s not get into calling a sin a sin. We’re just all about the “touchy-feely” Jesus is Love Gospel.

The Church teaches that compassion and nonjudgementalism take precedence in regard to more difficult moral questions such as abortion, sexual orientation, divorce and remarriage, birth control, and complex medical issues.

 

[Bamm]

You are kidding aren’t you? Well, I take that back. It can be misleading to other Christians.

There are several churches that claim that they are the Catholic Church, and they will tell you that they broke off from the Catholic Church. We even have a guy in Missouri that claims to be the Pope since Pope Paul got rid of the required Latin Mass. Sadly, these people claim to be the true Church, just as our brothers at the Church of Christ claim that they are the ones that descended from the Christian Church found in Acts (They were persecuted by the bastardized Catholic Church that Constantine founded and were forced underground for the next 1300 years - so much for “you are the light of the world”).

NotWorthy,

In liue of what you just said, how could anyone determine which “Catholic Church” is the true/correct “Catholic Church.”

You will tell me that it is the “Catholic Church” you belong to and someone else will tell me it is the “Catholic Church” they belong to. So, I would call that differences in denomination of Catholic churches. Wouldn’t you?

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

Petergee and others,

Here is one of the articles I mentioned. The title is: “Cardinals Meet Vatican Officials on Mass Texts: Can Rome Resist Pressure for Language Changes?”

I am assuming since this document came out of the Vatican, it would be accepted as speaking about “Catholic” churches. NOTE: They are talking about English-speaking Catholics.

adoremus.org/297-CardsVat.html

Bamm

And what you have here is the American Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church (unlike someone else, I don’t have a problem with being called Roman Catholic - it makes things clearer) working within the confines of the Church to try and change disciplines of the Church.

If the Pope says, “no, do not use gender neutral language, stick with what we gave you”, they would accede to his wishes and remain unchanged. If the Pope says, “do what you want, but I’d prefer to remain unchanged”, they’d probably change anyway. But in each case, they are acting within their rights as Bishops of the Church.

 

[Bamm]

Bamm, here’s your first clue about our friends at the “American Catholic Church”

This guy had a problem with the Catholic teaching and broke away, just as the Lutherans did years ago. The problem is, he kept the name Catholic. He, my good friend, is NOT Catholic.

And let’s not get into calling a sin a sin. We’re just all about the “touchy-feely” Jesus is Love Gospel.

NotWorthy,

Thank you and I can understand that. But as you can read I asked for clarification on what exactly Petergee wanted and he said anything. So, that is why I grabbed the first article I could find. As I explained or tried to explain to that person, the information I have been reading is contained within other articles that are not entirely about differences themselves. Therefore, it has been harder to find. I made my statement going on the things that I know I have read and to me, those things fall under the catagory of “differences between denominations.”

Bamm

 

[maurin]

As I said; anything, such as you post, that undermines the authority of the Holy Bible is not Christian.

Please provide the Book, Chapter and Verse that makes this same claim.

Obviously; you don’t “have” to prove what you call a “negative;” but if people are asking why; why can’t they be given an answer? Objections have to be answered or you will never convince all us “heretics” of anything.

THe Bible answers this question:

Both 2John 12 and 3 John 13 state: Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink, but I hope to come to see you and talk with you face to faceso that our joy may ber complete.

1 Thess 2:13: And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.

1 Cor 11:2: I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.

1 Cor 11:23: For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after…

My apologies if I have duplicated others’ responses.

Protestant101,

If your username refers to the beginning classes (like french 101, etc., that you might find at college), I believe the advanced classes are called simply “Catholicism.”

How can you say you trust the Bible as the sole and sufficient rule of faith when you ignore it in part?

 

[Bamm]

And what you have here is the American Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church (unlike someone else, I don’t have a problem with being called Roman Catholic - it makes things clearer) working within the confines of the Church to try and change disciplines of the Church.

If the Pope says, “no, do not use gender neutral language, stick with what we gave you”, they would accede to his wishes and remain unchanged. If the Pope says, “do what you want, but I’d prefer to remain unchanged”, they’d probably change anyway. But in each case, they are acting within their rights as Bishops of the Church.

NotWorthy,

Exactly, and I classify that as differences in denomination.

As I said, I have been trying to learn and have been reading many articles. Some I have gotten the link to off of this forum from the apologist’s questions and some from a friend who is a Roman Catholic priest.

Bamm

 

[jmcrae]

“What’s Your Authority?”

There are quite a number of points brought up in this article, which I would find interesting to study, discuss, or debate. One has to admit; there sure are a lot of divergent opinions on “authority” when it comes to religious matters, and understanding of doctrines and Holy Scripture. I would appreciate having a topic like this to gather and compare info, and to study into the nature of church authority as depicted in this article I have linked to. I will try to follow the train of thought in the article; and mention one point at a time, in the order they are talked about in the article.

In this article; a “script” is provided for Catholics who wish to refute anyone who believes that the Bible is “sufficient;” and I have some observations/comments about this kind of thing.

I’m not a fan of “scripted evangelism,” primarily because the “target” seldom knows his lines - he is always changing the subject, or bringing up objections that don’t appear in the script.

However, in answer to the question in the script:

1. It is a matter of Holy Tradition that the Bible even exists. The idea that there is a collection of books that we can refer to collectively as “the Word of God” comes from the Oral Tradition of the Catholic Church. Most of us learned this from our parents or Sunday School teachers, or else from the person who first evangelized us - that’s when we began to open the Scriptures and read them. Not before. Nobody has ever picked out the Bible at a library and shouted “Eureka, I have discovered the Word of God!” after comparing it to every other book that makes the same claim.

Before we knew that (if there was a “before” - our culture is pretty saturated with this particular bit of Tradition, and there are very few people even among the unchurched who haven’t heard of the Bible, even if they have never read it), the Bible was just one more book on the shelf, no more or less important than any other.

1. The Bible is full of references to the authority of Christ, the authority of the Holy Spirit, the authority of the Apostles, and so on - all of which of course are external to the Bible itself. It describes the Catholic Church as the “pillar and bulwark of Truth” - it does not claim that title for itself.