Who is the authority of your church?

[BrianH]

jmcrae and others
This is really a debate concerning semantics. No one denies there are roles in a church. I fully understand why someone would not be comfortable saying anything other than the Bible, Christ, or some form of that answer is the authority.

 

[jmcrae]

jmcrae and others
This is really a debate concerning semantics. No one denies there are roles in a church. I fully understand why someone would not be comfortable saying anything other than the Bible, Christ, or some form of that answer is the authority.

It comes down to the definition of authority. If someone is “in charge” of something, then he or she “has authority over” that thing - whether it be the Parents’ Sunday School committee, the mission statement of the Church, or whatever.

Authority in the Catholic Church is given by Jesus Christ, ultimately. (My boss is a priest; his boss is the Bishop, and the Bishop is in union with the Pope in Rome, and together they interpret the teachings of Jesus that have been handed down to us by the Apostles.) So, ultimately, Jesus is in charge of the Catholic Church. Probably more so than other churches, since we don’t just try to guess at what He might say - we look at what He actually did say.

 

[BrianH]

It comes down to the definition of authority. If someone is “in charge” of something, then he or she “has authority over” that thing - whether it be the Parents’ Sunday School committee, the mission statement of the Church, or whatever.

Authority in the Catholic Church is given by Jesus Christ, ultimately. (My boss is a priest; his boss is the Bishop, and the Bishop is in union with the Pope in Rome, and together they interpret the teachings of Jesus that have been handed down to us by the Apostles.) So, ultimately, Jesus is in charge of the Catholic Church. Probably more so than other churches, since we don’t just try to guess at what He might say - we look at what He actually did say.

You understand we do not agree. If I thought the Bishop of Rome was the ultimate successor, if everyone thought that, we would not have Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant and so forth. People who have examined this closely do come to different conclusions jmcrae.

 

[jmcrae]

You understand we do not agree. If I thought the Bishop of Rome was the ultimate successor, if everyone thought that, we would not have Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant and so forth. People who have examined this closely do come to different conclusions jmcrae.

The majority of people who disagree have never examined the question at all. They are simply doing what their ancestors did.

Those who examine the question for themselves quickly realize that the Bishop of Rome is indeed St. Peter’s successor. What they do with that information is up to them, but there is no doubt historically that Pope Benedict XVI, as Bishop of Rome at least, succeeds in a direct lineage from St. Peter - and most of them will even grant that he has “primacy” among the Bishops, while still reserving the right to remain separated from his church for reasons completely unrelated to Petrine succession and primacy.

 

[Righteousone]

You understand we do not agree. If I thought the Bishop of Rome was the ultimate successor, if everyone thought that, we would not have Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant and so forth. People who have examined this closely do come to different conclusions jmcrae.

Didn’t Jesus say that many will come in my name? No disrespect here but didn’t your “Methodist” Protestant denomination come into play in England from John Wesley? Why would you follow John Wesley and not the church that Christ gave to the Apostles?
Just curious.

 

[Elric]

Okay, so these people receive Locutions (voices in their heads, visions, etc.) directly from Christ.

Do they?

What happens when you have a dispute with your fellow churchman, and no voice comes into your head to tell you how to resolve the problem? Or what if the voice in your head tells you to commit a sin? Or what if the voice in the other person’s head tells him something different than what the voice told you?

I guess that you have to ask some who claims to have these voices in their head, I already expresses how I resolve disputes.

So, they tell Jesus what they want taught in the Sunday School, and then Jesus tells the Sunday School teacher what to teach, via Locutions (voices in her head)? Or how does that work?

First off, who are “they”?

Secondly, what are you on about?

(If the parents are telling the Sunday School teacher what they want to have taught in her class, why should she have to listen to them, if Jesus is her only authority? Why can’t she just decide on her own that Jesus wants her to teach something else? And then be all surprised when the parents fire her … )

I am not really sure what you are on about, but it seems like you are suggesting that parents should not take an interest in what their children learn and that they should not contribute to sunday school teaching. To me that seems like an odd stance to take.

 

[BrianH]

The majority of people who disagree have never examined the question at all. They are simply doing what their ancestors did.

Those who examine the question for themselves quickly realize that the Bishop of Rome is indeed St. Peter’s successor. What they do with that information is up to them, but there is no doubt historically that Pope Benedict XVI, as Bishop of Rome at least, succeeds in a direct lineage from St. Peter - and most of them will even grant that he has “primacy” among the Bishops, while still reserving the right to remain separated from his church for reasons completely unrelated to Petrine succession and primacy.

The first paragraph is accurate.
The second paragraph is not accurate. Many Orthodox scholars and writers address the nature of primacy and hold differing views. I am not talking internet here jmcrae.
I can assure you many historians do not agree with you. I think you know that but the internet is for bluster and certainity, not true discourse.

 

[BrianH]

Didn’t Jesus say that many will come in my name? No disrespect here but didn’t your “Methodist” Protestant denomination come into play in England from John Wesley? Why would you follow John Wesley and not the church that Christ gave to the Apostles?
Just curious.

While I believe the Catholic Church holds to the teachings found in scripture and tradition, I do not think they do so completely. Come on guys, do not act like reasonable people have not examined this. You make disagree but do not simplify it to the ridiculous.

 

[jmcrae]

I am not really sure what you are on about, but it seems like you are suggesting that parents should not take an interest in what their children learn and that they should not contribute to sunday school teaching. To me that seems like an odd stance to take.

Aren’t they taking authority away from Jesus, if they tell the Sunday School teacher what to do? (Or fire her if she doesn’t do it?)

Or does Jesus give authority to human beings, like the Catholic Church says?

 

[Righteousone]

While I believe the Catholic Church holds to the teachings found in scripture and tradition, I do not think they do so completely. Come on guys, do not act like reasonable people have not examined this. You make disagree but do not simplify it to the ridiculous.

But you haven’t answered my question. I seriously would like a simple answer, perhaps one sentence, why you follow John Wesley’s church and not the church started by Christ? Isn’t this what the thread means?
And what don’t you believe in the Catholic church?

 

[BrianH]

But you haven’t answered my question. I seriously would like a simple answer, perhaps one sentence, why you follow John Wesley’s church and not the church started by Christ? Isn’t this what the thread means?
And what don’t you believe in the Catholic church?

I do not know you and will assume good intentions.
I believe that the Methodist Church is a continuation of Christ’s church. Just like I think that you are as well. I do not hold an exclusive view of this obviously. Most Christians do not.
I am not going to get into specific differences. That would take days. Let’s keep it real.

 

[Righteousone]

I do not know you and will assume good intentions.
I believe that the Methodist Church is a continuation of Christ’s church. Just like I think that you are as well. I do not hold an exclusive view of this obviously. Most Christians do not.
I am not going to get into specific differences. That would take days. Let’s keep it real.

How is it the continuation of Christs church, if there were only Catholics and man’s beliefs back then were truly Catholic in belief?
Then how does John Wesley enter the picture? We know he started the Methodist church?

 

[jmcrae]

I do not know you and will assume good intentions.
I believe that the Methodist Church is a continuation of Christ’s church. Just like I think that you are as well.

How can they both be continuations of Christ’s Church? They teach entirely opposite things.

At most, only one of the two can be Christ’s Church. Worst case scenario, neither of them is, and we need to start looking elsewhere, but it is not possible for contradictory things to both be true.

 

[Publisher]

But you haven’t answered my question. I seriously would like a simple answer, perhaps one sentence, why you follow John Wesley’s church and not the church started by Christ? Isn’t this what the thread means?
And what don’t you believe in the Catholic church?

I believe that is the issue…those of us who do not feel that the Catholic church best represents the teachings of Christ belong to a group of Christians whom we feel best represents the teachings of Christ…our definition of “Church” is different…none of us believe that the assembly of believers we meet with alone consists of the “Church started by Christ”…all of God’s redeememed ARE the Church…the Church encompasses all who have found faith in Christ…God’s Congreagation is one in Christ, we don’t all believe the exact same things about small issues, but it’s not the small issues that bind us together…we are bound together by Christ himself…not our doctrinal beliefs…our “oneness” is found in him and in him alone…it too is a matter of grace…our “oneness” is through his work in us, not our beliefs about when to stand or kneel or sit…or whether to use sprinkling or pouring or immersion…or whether the bread and wine change or not…Christ and Christ alone works within us to redeem us and transform us into his people of faith…again it is Christ work within us that makes us “one in Christ” not what denomination we belong to…the “oneness” we believe in transcends all labels…he is our Shepherd…regardless of the sign outside the building we meet in to worship.

 

[BrianH]

How is it the continuation of Christs church, if there were only Catholics and man’s beliefs back then were truly Catholic in belief?
Then how does John Wesley enter the picture? We know he started the Methodist church?

I have read enough to realize there was a high degree of differences and development over the course of 2,000 years.
As a Methodist, while I look to scripture and tradition, we also look at reason and experience as well.
John Wesley enters the picture like so many other Christians do over the last 2,000 years. I appreciate and understand our restoration advocates on here. I hold a different view about the efficacy of such an attempt.

 

[Righteousone]

I believe that is the issue…those of us who do not feel that the Catholic church best represents the teachings of Christ belong to a group of Christians whom we feel best represents the teachings of Christ…our definition of “Church” is different…none of us believe that the assembly of believers we meet with alone consists of the “Church started by Christ”…all of God’s redeememed ARE the Church…the Church encompasses all who have found faith in Christ…God’s Congreagation is one in Christ, we don’t all believe the exact same things about small issues, but it’s not the small issues that bind us together…we are bound together by Christ himself…not our doctrinal beliefs…our “oneness” is found in him and in him alone…it too is a matter of grace…our “oneness” is through his work in us, not our beliefs about when to stand or kneel or sit…or whether to use sprinkling or pouring or immersion…or whether the bread and wine change or not…Christ and Christ alone works within us to redeem us and transform us into his people of faith…again it is Christ work within us that makes us “one in Christ” not what denomination we belong to…the “oneness” we believe in transcends all labels…he is our Shepherd…regardless of the sign outside the building we meet in to worship.

I know you are a good man and a man who loves Christ but I’m afraid when you say you don’t care about the bread and wine turning into Christ is what I have a problem with. Also the Holy Mass is from God. I will pray that you know the true church of Christ.

 

[BrianH]

How can they both be continuations of Christ’s Church? They teach entirely opposite things.

At most, only one of the two can be Christ’s Church. Worst case scenario, neither of them is, and we need to start looking elsewhere, but it is not possible for contradictory things to both be true.

Your glass is half empty jmcrae. I suggest to you that the dialogue between us suggests differently.

There is “considerable degree of convergence”, your own Pope has said so

 

[jmcrae]

Your glass is half empty jmcrae. I suggest to you that the dialogue between us suggests differently.

There is “considerable degree of convergence”, your own Pope has said so

There is, but he has also not taken on any Methodist Bishops into the Conclave, nor has he given permission for us to intercommune - we have certain things in common, but we are still in completely different churches.

 

[BrianH]

There is, but he has also not taken on any Methodist Bishops into the Conclave, nor has he given permission for us to intercommune - we have certain things in common, but we are still in completely different churches.

We disagree.

 

[jmcrae]

We disagree.

I think that was my point.