What Is Your Authority?

[NotWorthy]

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

But it’s not a difference in denomination. The Church can desire to change the language. But if the Pope says no, then he means “No”. If the Pope that that’s OK, then it’s simply a more gender neutral reading of the Scriptures. It doesn’t change anything about the teachings of the Faith.

For instance, Would you consider two Lutheran churches different denominations if one prefers the KJV while the other prefers the NIV?

 

[Bamm]

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

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,

you might want to take the advanced class–is there a protestant 201 or 301? I believe these 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?

maurin,

LOL. You hit the nail on the head. I don’t think our good friend Protestant101 has been reading the answers that people have been posting.

It reminds me of when one of my kids would keep giving me arguments in support of something they wanted AFTER I had already told them, yes. Ya kinda gotta get 'em wound down, so they can hear what is being said to them.

Bamm

 

[Bamm]

But it’s not a difference in denomination. The Church can desire to change the language. But if the Pope says no, then he means “No”. If the Pope that that’s OK, then it’s simply a more gender neutral reading of the Scriptures. It doesn’t change anything about the teachings of the Faith.

For instance, Would you consider two Lutheran churches different denominations if one prefers the KJV while the other prefers the NIV?

NotWorthy,

To a degree, yes. Some of the passages between the two vertions change in meaning. Example: II Peter 1:1, the NIV removes the “our” in front of “Savior Jesus Christ.”

It isn’t the desire that makes the difference it is the change itself. It was passed, right? So, English speaking (predominantly American) churches have that distinction. That is a tribunal difference in denomination.

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

NotWorthy,

To a degree, yes. It isn’t the desire that makes the difference it is the change itself. It was passed, right? So, English speaking (predominantly American) churches have that distinction. That is a tribunal difference in denomination.

Bamm

I don’t see the difference. I’ll ask again:
Would you consider two Lutheran churches different denominations if one prefers the KJV while the other prefers the NIV?

 

[Bamm]

I don’t see the difference. I’ll ask again:
Would you consider two Lutheran churches different denominations if one prefers the KJV while the other prefers the NIV?

NotWorthy,

I edited my post and added an example while you were posting. Does that clarify? As I said, it is to a smaller degree, but present none the less.

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

NotWorthy,

I edited my post and added an example while you were posting. Does that clarify? As I said, it is to a smaller degree, but present none the less.

Bamm

I can see that you think it’s a change, but to me it’s not a change. Now, if any of these changes necessitated a change in doctrine, then you’d have me.

For instance, our good Luther adding the words “By Faith ALONE are we saved”, caused an entire change in the teaching doctrine of the Lutheran Church.

I don’t see that in the inclusive language of the Catholic Liturgy. Maybe a point closer to home, if someone used the inclusive language to deduce that men AND WOMEN can be priests, then you’ve got a point.

 

[grandfather]

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

The word catholic (universal) was first used by Ignatius a disciple of John the Apostle in a letter in which he gave the “four marks” of the Church, a way people could know “the” Church. His definition was included in the Apostle’s Creed, the first doctrinal statement of the Church and embraced by all the original Protestant reformers. Ignatius, who was martyred said that “the” Church is one, holy, catholic and apostolic. None of the reformers denied the universality (catholicity) of the Church. None of them denied this creed explicitly. They all accepted it and most mainline denominations still do. What they deny by their act of separation is the oneness component. So we have denominationalism, a fracturing Christendom. Unity is destroyed and the consequences are the destruction of Christian civilization as we see happening before our eyes.

 

[jmcrae]

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

We consider “Catholic” to be any church that is in full communion with the Pope in Rome. Anything else is a “wanna be,” at best.

We all share the same Catechism, the same prayers, most of the same disciplines (with minor variations from place to place) and the same Holy Tradtion. There are also certain minor differences in style from place to place - some parishes use more Latin than others, for example, and there is a wide variety of different styles of architecture. But the things explicitly handed down by the Apostles remain the same.

 

[grandfather]

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

Catholics have a saying that might help clarify. “Where the pope is, there is the Church”.

 

[Bamm]

We consider “Catholic” to be any church that is in full communion with the Pope in Rome. Anything else is a “wanna be,” at best.

We all share the same Catechism, the same prayers, most of the same disciplines (with minor variations from place to place) and the same Holy Tradtion. There are also certain minor differences in style from place to place - some parishes use more Latin than others, for example, and there is a wide variety of different styles of architecture. But the things explicitly handed down by the Apostles remain the same.

jmcrae,

Thank you, for pointing out these other differences.

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

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

My last comment on this point is, If a thief declares he’s innocent in court, does that make him innocent?

Of course not.

Neither does that make a church Catholic just because it declares it.

 

[Bamm]

The word catholic (universal) was first used by Ignatius a disciple of John the Apostle in a letter in which he gave the “four marks” of the Church, a way people could know “the” Church. His definition was included in the Apostle’s Creed, the first doctrinal statement of the Church and embraced by all the original Protestant reformers. Ignatius, who was martyred said that “the” Church is one, holy, catholic and apostolic. None of the reformers denied the universality (catholicity) of the Church. None of them denied this creed explicitly. They all accepted it and most mainline denominations still do. What they deny by their act of separation is the oneness component. So we have denominationalism, a fracturing Christendom. Unity is destroyed and the consequences are the destruction of Christian civilization as we see happening before our eyes.

grandfather,

original question:

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, there are none.

Bamm

 

[Bamm]

My last comment on this point is, If a thief declares he’s innocent in court, does that make him innocent?

Of course not.

Neither does that make a church Catholic just because it declares it.

NotWorthy,

By the same token, the Roman Catholic Church declaring that it is “THE” true church and Christ’s Church does not make it so.

Bamm

 

[NotWorthy]

NotWorthy,

By the same token, the Roman Catholic Church declaring that it is “THE” true church and Christ’s Church does not make it so.

Bamm

No. But the four marks that it stands on is much more convincing than any off-shoot of Luther’s traditions of men.

Also, the words of the good Gamaliel would serve as a testament to the Christ driven origins of the Catholic Church.

 

[NotWorthy]

grandfather,

original question:

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, there are none.

Bamm

Does this mean you don’t believe in the Trinity? I don’t recall the Apostles using that phrase either.

Also, I don’t recall the Church having justification to be called universal during the time of the Apostles, for it hadn’t spread to all the known civilized world at this point.

 

[jmcrae]

grandfather,

original question:

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

Catholic means “world wide.” Jesus told the Apostles to go forth into the whole world, baptizing (using the Sacraments) and preaching (passing on the Oral Tradition).

Guess which Church does that? (Did you know that not only is there no square inch of earth that does not have its own Catholic Bishop, there is also even a Diocese on the Moon? So, if a Catholic goes to the Moon, and he has a question about the Liturgy or about something in the Catechism, there is actually someone in authority over him, that he can ask. (The Bishop of the Moon doesn’t actually live on the Moon, of course. That’ll come later.)

(And guess which ones are found only in certain parts of the world? )

 

[grandfather]

grandfather,

original question:

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, there are none.

Bamm

You are correct. What Bible verse or other document that an original apostle authored says polygamy is forbidden?

There are none. Luther holding strictly to sola fide therefore taught polygamy was acceptable.

 

[po18guy]

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?

Do you agree that Christ founded one church in Matthew 16? Since catholic means “universal”, is that not the type of church Christ founded? ("…make disciples of all nations") The name came from a definition of what His church is meant to be, like “Trinity” comes from that described in Scripture, even though the term itself was not in Scripture. Your opinions are formed from a basis of separation within the church. The early church endeavored mightily to retain unity, which is what Christ intended. Catholic, or universal, opinions come from a basis of unity in Christ’s church. Unity requires humility, and the suppression of ego.

Christ’s peace.

 

[Petergee]

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

Then you have a totally different definition of “denomination” to what the rest of the world uses.
A denomination is not just a difference of opinion.

IF the Pope had said to the US bishops “DO NOT use inclusive language” and IF they had replied “Go to blazes, we’ll do what we ruddy well want to do, you can’t tell us what to do” then this MAY have been the beginnings of a new schismatic church if they continued denying his authority over them. Even then, they would not have become a new denomination unless they then invented some new doctrinal or moral teaching which was contrary to Catholic teaching.

 

[Petergee]

I can agree with that adding that we can read and know that they had their differences. But lets set that aside.

They had no doctrinal diffferences.

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

Acts 9:31. Your favourite Bible probably renders it as “the Church throughout all”. But the original Greek text is “Ekklesia Katha holos” - “the Catholic Church”.