Who says one organization today is "The True Church"

[jmcrae]

We need to organize a take Calgary take-over of these forums.

Nope, you can join at any church. Aside from myself (being OCA), I know we have several Greek Orthodox and a Bulgarian Orthodox person on these forums, all of them coming from a non-Eastern European background.

Might want to get some clarification on that. St. Peter’s is where I go, and we’ve got about 7 or 8 Russian speakers there, and our priest isn’t one of them. In fact you’re more likely to hear Romanian than Russian down at lunch after the Divine Liturgy. I suspect St. Peter’s just piqued your friends interest in Russian, personally it is a major reason I started taking Greek (90% of our icons are in Greek).
Also not sure what you mean by citizenship lessons, unless you mean the classes the church holds for catechumens. While those aren’t technically required - I know of at least one person who didn’t do them - they are highly recommended, and are little different than RCIA classes (from my understanding, obviously I’ve never done RCIA).

They wanted him to have a strong understanding of Russian culture and customs, and they included that as part of his training in the Catechumenate - he was the one who said it felt like citizenship classes. He had to know the flag and the national anthem and things like that.

PS: What do you want to bet we live in the same neighborhood.

 

[Nine_Two]

They wanted him to have a strong understanding of Russian culture and customs, and they included that as part of his training in the Catechumenate - he was the one who said it felt like citizenship classes. He had to know the flag and the national anthem and things like that.

PS: What do you want to bet we live in the same neighborhood.

That’s really odd. How long ago was this? To be honest I don’t know much about how it was run before the current priest came over, I know there was a different one back when it was a Mission, I’m going to have to look into that stuff.

At any rate, currently you don’t have to know anything about Russia to be a catechumen, just the major doctrinal points, although since the church is OCA, which originated with Moscow, many of the customs of the parish are Russian in origin.

 

[Monte1945]

I think that if one was to attempt to “evaluate” a chruch as being the “True Church”
one would have to first “know” what the True Church was to be and then one mighty
be able to measure other churches up against it to see if it measured up to being
what might be considered the true church…

Maybe we need to attempt to list those attributes which we feel the True Church
should have and teach.

The first point I would like to contribute to this image is that The True Church
should have a means to offer “forgiveness of my sins”…

Please don’t roll your eyes at that comment as though I was talking like a child.

(though one must come to God as a child in order to enter into his kingdom, Jesus
said)

The reason I mention that, is because in my school days, I was shocked to discover that the Jewish/Christian faith is the only faith of all the world religions which offers “God’s forgiveness for one’s sins”. I have had opportunities to come across men and women of different world religions which said that was true. So I think that point is a good starting place…

What else would the True Church have to have?

 

[josie_L]

Amen.

But there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that passage of Scripture that precludes the posibility of this ONE CHURCH existing in MANY ORGANIZATION. I do observe that in the trinity we have ONE GOD existing in THREE PERSONS.

(I can use caps also)

Actually, the Holy Trinity should be defined as three persons in one God, and therefore, many dioceses subsisting in one catholic/universal Church.

 

[AmateurPianist]

I think that if one was to attempt to “evaluate” a chruch as being the “True Church”
one would have to first “know” what the True Church was to be and then one mighty
be able to measure other churches up against it to see if it measured up to being
what might be considered the true church…

Maybe we need to attempt to list those attributes which we feel the True Church
should have and teach.

The first point I would like to contribute to this image is that The True Church
should have a means to offer “forgiveness of my sins”…

Please don’t roll your eyes at that comment as though I was talking like a child.

(though one must come to God as a child in order to enter into his kingdom, Jesus
said)

The reason I mention that, is because in my school days, I was shocked to discover that the Jewish/Christian faith is the only faith of all the world religions which offers “God’s forgiveness for one’s sins”. I have had opportunities to come across men and women of different world religions which said that was true. So I think that point is a good starting place…

What else would the True Church have to have?

Interesting.

Now this could lead to a debate on whether a Catholic priest has the power to forgive sins. And I have some questions I could ask here if I wanted to. But I for one don’t really want to go there because Catholic confession is one part of Catholicism I really don’t have issues with.

And I could note, if you are asking for opinions, that I have always been of the opinion that if only one organization was the one true church and God provided benefits to this one organization that He does not to other organizations, that this organization should pass the smell test of possessing a superior Christianity that outworks itself in a superior way to all of the other organizations. Otherwise, what is the sense of being the One True Church if you are just as messed up as everybody else.

But what I am really interested in is whether God has clearly chimed in on the issue. Can I read somewhere where God has plainly spoken that if you observe what appears to be the church existing in multiple organizations that only one of these organizations can be the one true church. And by the way, use this metric to determine the one true church out of all the phony ones.

 

[hillsteven]

Interesting.

Now this could lead to a debate on whether a Catholic priest has the power to forgive sins. And I have some questions I could ask here if I wanted to. But I for one don’t really want to go there because Catholic confession is one part of Catholicism I really don’t have issues with.

Fair enough.

And I could note, if you are asking for opinions, that I have always been of the opinion that if only one organization was the one true church and God provided benefits to this one organization that He does not to other organizations, that this organization should pass the smell test of possessing a superior Christianity that outworks itself in a superior way to all of the other organizations. Otherwise, what is the sense of being the One True Church if you are just as messed up as everybody else.

That opinion seems quite reasonable. I would argue that there ARE, in actual fact, benefits available through the Catholic Church (And I would incorporate the Eastern Orthdox churches in this statement, for reasons I hope I’ve made clear in earlier posts) that are not available anywhere else. Those extraordinary benefits can be found in the 7 Sacraments. This is one reason that we Catholics refer to the “fullness of the Catholic Church”. Not because we view our separated brethren as being part of an invalid religion/organization, but because they only have access to a truncated version of the many graces our Lord has made available to us via the church He established upon Peter.

But what I am really interested in is whether God has clearly chimed in on the issue. Can I read somewhere where God has plainly spoken that if you observe what appears to be the church existing in multiple organizations that only one of these organizations can be the one true church. And by the way, use this metric to determine the one true church out of all the phony ones.

I’m at work, so can’t expound on this one as much as I would like to at this time, but the short answer is that yes, He has. We can see in scripture where he establishes a church… singular. That church has been understood, as we can see from the writings of even the earliest church fathers, to be a single, tangible entity, or to equate with your words, a single organization, not a “mystical body” as I have described/defined earlier.

 

[AmateurPianist]

That opinion seems quite reasonable. I would argue that there ARE, in actual fact, benefits available through the Catholic Church (And I would incorporate the Eastern Orthdox churches in this statement, for reasons I hope I’ve made clear in earlier posts) that are not available anywhere else. Those extraordinary benefits can be found in the 7 Sacraments. This is one reason that we Catholics refer to the “fullness of the Catholic Church”. Not because we view our separated brethren as being part of an invalid religion/organization, but because they only have access to a truncated version of the many graces our Lord has made available to us via the church He established upon Peter.

That is not quite what I meant. What I meant to say is that if in fact an organization claims special benefits from God that He can and will not give the other organizations, I expect to see a superior brand of Christianity lived out in every day life from the organization so blessed by God. Otherwise I have to ask what is the point.

Oh, and there is one benefit that is mutually exclusive between the Catholics and the Orthodox. And that is leadership that is incapable of being incorrect. Two organizations proclaiming mutually exclusive dogma can not both be incapable of being incorrect.

I’m at work, so can’t expound on this one as much as I would like to at this time, but the short answer is that yes, He has. We can see in scripture where he establishes a church… singular. That church has been understood, as we can see from the writings of even the earliest church fathers, to be a single, tangible entity, or to equate with your words, a single organization, not a “mystical body” as I have described/defined earlier.

Remember we agree that the church at the time of the apostles was one organization. (we might disagree on how this one organization looked but that is secondary). We also agree that the church existing in multiple competing organizations proclaiming mutually exclusive dogma is probably not what Jesus had in mind.

The issue is whether it guaranteed that throughout the church age until the time of Christ’s return that the church must exist in one and exclusively one organization. Or put another way, is it possible for the church to exist in a state which really is not quite what Jesus had in mind.

 

[hillsteven]

That is not quite what I meant. What I meant to say is that if in fact an organization claims special benefits from God that He can and will not give the other organizations, I expect to see a superior brand of Christianity lived out in every day life from the organization so blessed by God. Otherwise I have to ask what is the point.

There is a flaw in your logic here… There is (and always has been) a distinct difference between the body of the church/organization, and the individual members of said.

There are, in actual fact, graces that are available via the Catholic/Orthodox church, and those would be the Sacraments.

The flaw in your logic is that you seem to be assuming that because they are available, that every member of these churches would definitely and consistently benefit in a tangible and outward way. This is a flaw because of the reality of free will. Just because we as Catholics have access to the Sacraments and the graces that they provide us, we must avail ourselves of them, or the reality of their existence is immaterial. God does not now, nor has he ever, forced his grace upon us. We must freely come to him seeking his grace. Because I am Catholic, I have access to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, wherein my sins are forgiven me. I can tell you from firsthand experience that there are most assuredly visible and tangible results in addition to the ones that cannot readily be discerned. When I avail myself of this Sacrament on a routine basis, I am much better equipped to guard myself against sin, and I can assure you my wife, the person on earth who knows me the best, notices the difference. That being said, if I choose to go months between taking advantage of this Sacrament, that is my choice to make.

Sadly, there are thousands of Catholics who have access to these same graces, but choose not to take advantage of them, just as there are thousands of non-Catholic Christians who attend church weekly, and then ignore what they are taught the rest of the week.

Hope that helps!

~Steven

 

[hillsteven]

The issue is whether it guaranteed that throughout the church age until the time of Christ’s return that the church must exist in one and exclusively one organization. Or put another way, is it possible for the church to exist in a state which really is not quite what Jesus had in mind.

To this I would argue simply that a house divided cannot stand, and Christ did promise that his Church would not fall.

 

[wisdomseeker]

**

That is not quite what I meant. What I meant to say is that if in fact an organization claims special benefits from God that He can and will not give the other organizations, I expect to see a superior brand of Christianity lived out in every day life from the organization so blessed by God. Otherwise I have to ask what is the point.

Oh, and there is one benefit that is mutually exclusive between the Catholics and the Orthodox. And that is leadership that is incapable of being incorrect. Two organizations proclaiming mutually exclusive dogma can not both be incapable of being incorrect.

Remember we agree that the church at the time of the apostles was one organization. (we might disagree on how this one organization looked but that is secondary). We also agree that the church existing in multiple competing organizations proclaiming mutually exclusive dogma is probably not what Jesus had in mind.

The issue is whether it guaranteed that throughout the church age until the time of Christ’s return that the church must exist in one and exclusively one organization. Or put another way, is it possible for the church to exist in a state which really is not quite what Jesus had in mind.**

what do you mean by a superior brand of Christianity? can you be more specific?

** “A Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body; cut off, he is made a heretic; the Spirit does not follow an amputated member.”
Saint Augustine… **

 

[jmcrae]

That’s really odd. How long ago was this?

It would have been around 1996 or '97.

 

[jmcrae]

That is not quite what I meant. What I meant to say is that if in fact an organization claims special benefits from God that He can and will not give the other organizations, I expect to see a superior brand of Christianity lived out in every day life from the organization so blessed by God. Otherwise I have to ask what is the point.

If the Catholic Church had never existed, there are many benefits that society would never have gained. For example, the monastery system is what led to the establishment of Universities in the 12th century. Our legal system of “innocent until proven guilty” would not exist. Hospitals (which arose out of convents) would not exist.

Oh, and there is one benefit that is mutually exclusive between the Catholics and the Orthodox. And that is leadership that is incapable of being incorrect. Two organizations proclaiming mutually exclusive dogma can not both be incapable of being incorrect.

As far as I know, the Orthodox generally believe everything that we do, except for the infallibility of the Pope. They don’t say that anyone else is infallible in his place. They also still say that the Pope is the Patriarch of the West, even though he is separated from their communion.

Remember we agree that the church at the time of the apostles was one organization. (we might disagree on how this one organization looked but that is secondary). We also agree that the church existing in multiple competing organizations proclaiming mutually exclusive dogma is probably not what Jesus had in mind.

Right …

The issue is whether it guaranteed that throughout the church age until the time of Christ’s return that the church must exist in one and exclusively one organization.

If schism was not Christ’s original plan, then what do you think?

Or put another way, is it possible for the church to exist in a state which really is not quite what Jesus had in mind.

There’s quite a jump from that, to saying that the Church became invisible and lost all meaningful authority to the point where it’s pretty much “every man for himself, Devil take the hindmost.”

 

[Bill_Pick]

The catholic church does not condemn any other christian church… She states that
she proclaims the Truths of God from what they taught from the start of God’s revelation to mankind. She has passed those truths down, in preaching and of writing and preserving these two traditions the scriptures and oral taught truths of Gode.

She saids of the other Christian churches for as far as they lift up Jesus Christ and Him Crucifed and Resserected they are part of the Mother chruch. She also reconizes that some of these brother churches do not teach all of God’s revealed Truths.

And that She “does” teach all that has been revealed as it has been revealed and even those truths which reason can not understand…

Nothing more and nothing less… I am a catholic christian as I find it has a full course
of spiritual nutrition in comparison of the other churches which seem to me to only offer a part of that same spiritual nutition need.

I find the division of the christian churches a sign of confusion to the lost of our world.
I do not, want to be part of holding some lost person back from finding God through Faith in their life time. I have not found any reason to find the Catholic Church in error in any form. It holds up Jesus Christ as God in the form of Son… and him crucified for my salvation.

A+

 

[AmateurPianist]

There is a flaw in your logic here… There is (and always has been) a distinct difference between the body of the church/organization, and the individual members of said.

There are, in actual fact, graces that are available via the Catholic/Orthodox church, and those would be the Sacraments.

The flaw in your logic is that you seem to be assuming that because they are available, that every member of these churches would definitely and consistently benefit in a tangible and outward way. This is a flaw because of the reality of free will. Just because we as Catholics have access to the Sacraments and the graces that they provide us, we must avail ourselves of them, or the reality of their existence is immaterial. God does not now, nor has he ever, forced his grace upon us. We must freely come to him seeking his grace. Because I am Catholic, I have access to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, wherein my sins are forgiven me. I can tell you from firsthand experience that there are most assuredly visible and tangible results in addition to the ones that cannot readily be discerned. When I avail myself of this Sacrament on a routine basis, I am much better equipped to guard myself against sin, and I can assure you my wife, the person on earth who knows me the best, notices the difference. That being said, if I choose to go months between taking advantage of this Sacrament, that is my choice to make.

Sadly, there are thousands of Catholics who have access to these same graces, but choose not to take advantage of them, just as there are thousands of non-Catholic Christians who attend church weekly, and then ignore what they are taught the rest of the week.

Hope that helps!

~Steven

Hi:
I fear that I have sort of danced around what I was trying to say for fear of being misunderstood (since I have been misunderstood in the past). But I will just spit it out.

I have a big disconnect when I read about (1) an organization claiming to be the one true church with special benefits and superior->inferior (2) this same organization being associated with (a) inquisitions and other cases of Christians killing Christians for Jesus in the past (b) the priest abuse scandals of today.

Now let me be clear. I am not raising these to claim “We are better than you”. You are absolutely right that we have done and do the same thing.

But these do serve as evidence in my mind that “you are just as messed up as we are”.

As well as just observing Catholics versus Protestants in everyday life and here (by observing Catholics here versus Protestants it still seems true that “you are just as messed up as we are”.

I guess I am looking for some evidence of observing you versus us that you possess a very special faith that possesses something we just don’t have. And I just don’t see it.

This of course does not logically disprove anything. I: am not dealing with logic here just as much as perception.

 

[AmateurPianist]

To this I would argue simply that a house divided cannot stand, and Christ did promise that his Church would not fall.

This verse actually made me think a little bit. And that is good.

I did wonder whether Christianity today (existing in multiple organizations) was an exact parallel to the context of this verse (Satan casting out Satan). I can point to unifying elements that exist in all of these organizations which are evidence in my mind that Christianity really exists in a partially divided state. In other words Christianity existing in multiple organizations is not a total break of unity, only a partial one.

Ultimately though what you are saying by citing this verse is that the first time the church divides into multiple organizations and every subsequent time that on the basis of this verse the response of God is Christianity can not survive in this state. I have to choose one organization that will still be my church.

Now even if the scope of this verse applies to Christianity dividing into multiple organizations (which I am not convinced it does) it could also be equally possible that the response of God is that He will work with what He has for a period of time but also has a plan to ultimately fix it And since we are not at the end of the age, right now God is working with what He has. That seems equally believable (if not more so).

 

[AmateurPianist]

**
what do you mean by a superior brand of Christianity? can you be more specific?
**
I think I was earlier this morning.

 

[AmateurPianist]

I do observe a post here by somebody on my one person ignore list that I will not be responding to.

If the Catholic Church had never existed, there are many benefits that society would never have gained. For example, the monastery system is what led to the establishment of Universities in the 12th century. Our legal system of “innocent until proven guilty” would not exist. Hospitals (which arose out of convents) would not exist.

We could argue that there were benefits to society from other organizations also. So then we could get into a shouting match as to who did more. I don’t want to go there.

As far as I know, the Orthodox generally believe everything that we do, except for the infallibility of the Pope. They don’t say that anyone else is infallible in his place. They also still say that the Pope is the Patriarch of the West, even though he is separated from their communion.

’
I do know that the Orthodox either have a different belief in purgatory or do not believe in it at all. I do know that the Orthodox have a different understanding of the Immaculate Conception. I do know that the Orthodox have a different understanding of authority.

Similar but not identical is still mutually exclusive. Both can not have the benefit of leadership being incapable of being incorrect.

If schism was not Christ’s original plan, then what do you think?

Oh that God is well able to work with the mess that He has and that He still can advance His kingdom on earth despite it. Oh and that He just might have a plan to fix this before the end of the age.

There’s quite a jump from that, to saying that the Church became invisible and lost all meaningful authority to the point where it’s pretty much “every man for himself, Devil take the hindmost.”

I am not quite sure what you are saying. But if you are painting a very pessimistic picture of the church, I just don’t share your pessimism. I still see God at work and moving amongst His people, bringing those who do not know Him to a relationship with His son and advancing the message of the gospel to all tribes and peoples. That does not sound to me like a church that the gates of hell have prevailed against. Even if it does exist in multiple organizations.

 

[hillsteven]

Hi:
I fear that I have sort of danced around what I was trying to say for fear of being misunderstood (since I have been misunderstood in the past). But I will just spit it out.

I have a big disconnect when I read about (1) an organization claiming to be the one true church with special benefits and superior->inferior (2) this same organization being associated with (a) inquisitions and other cases of Christians killing Christians for Jesus in the past (b) the priest abuse scandals of today.

Now let me be clear. I am not raising these to claim “We are better than you”. You are absolutely right that we have done and do the same thing.

But these do serve as evidence in my mind that “you are just as messed up as we are”.

As well as just observing Catholics versus Protestants in everyday life and here (by observing Catholics here versus Protestants it still seems true that “you are just as messed up as we are”.

I guess I am looking for some evidence of observing you versus us that you possess a very special faith that possesses something we just don’t have. And I just don’t see it.

This of course does not logically disprove anything. I: am not dealing with logic here just as much as perception.

Well said, actually. I still think you’re missing the point, though, and that would be the distinction between “The Catholic Church as an institution” and “The Catholics who make up that institution”.

Since you brought up the inquisition, I’ll use that as a starting point to make my point. There can be no dancing around it, that was a series of atrocities that has no excuse. I could point out that the extent of the atrocities that have made them so famous was in actual fact far less prolific as we all seem to think they were, but even one instance is one too many, so that’s not really an excuse. The point needs to be made, however, that while men, as individuals or even small groups of people, are sinners, that does not mean that the Church has erred. The teachings of the Church have never really changed, but the means by which sadly misled men, who did happen to be leaders in the Church, was surely in grave error. The same would go for the recent pedophilia instances with several priests. These are grave sins indeed, yet the Church teachings in no way endorse that sin. I notice that you completely missed the fact that one could also point out that there have been popes who were murderers, adulterers, and worse. These are the sins of men. The greatest sin is to deny the Holy Spirit, and we see in scripture itself where Peter denied Christ not once, but three times… yet we see later where Jesus not only forgave that man his sins, but entrusted the Church to him! (“Feed my sheep…”)

The point I’m making is that while there have been innumerable instances where men in positions of authority in the Church have sinned, the Church has never taught in error and has never contradicted herself. Jesus came to save sinners, so to expect that to be Christian in the true church would necessitate the ability to resist sin seems folly.

Just some food for thought…

God Bless, my friend!

 

[AmateurPianist]

Well said, actually. I still think you’re missing the point, though, and that would be the distinction between “The Catholic Church as an institution” and “The Catholics who make up that institution”.

Since you brought up the inquisition, I’ll use that as a starting point to make my point. There can be no dancing around it, that was a series of atrocities that has no excuse. I could point out that the extent of the atrocities that have made them so famous was in actual fact far less prolific as we all seem to think they were, but even one instance is one too many, so that’s not really an excuse. The point needs to be made, however, that while men, as individuals or even small groups of people, are sinners, that does not mean that the Church has erred. The teachings of the Church have never really changed, but the means by which sadly misled men, who did happen to be leaders in the Church, was surely in grave error. The same would go for the recent pedophilia instances with several priests. These are grave sins indeed, yet the Church teachings in no way endorse that sin. I notice that you completely missed the fact that one could also point out that there have been popes who were murderers, adulterers, and worse. These are the sins of men. The greatest sin is to deny the Holy Spirit, and we see in scripture itself where Peter denied Christ not once, but three times… yet we see later where Jesus not only forgave that man his sins, but entrusted the Church to him! (“Feed my sheep…”)

The point I’m making is that while there have been innumerable instances where men in positions of authority in the Church have sinned, the Church has never taught in error and has never contradicted herself. Jesus came to save sinners, so to expect that to be Christian in the true church would necessitate the ability to resist sin seems folly.

Just some food for thought…

God Bless, my friend!

Hi.

I know what you are saying. I have been told that before here. I guess my point is that if the God sees the Catholic church as an institution (organization) as superior to all other Christian organizations that somehow I should see this relationship reflected in the people that make up these institutions.

I certainly do not expect any organization to be perfect. The Bible teaches we are all sinners. The New Testament certainly has folks that are not perfect. My expectations are not perfection, just a positive difference. If you appear to be just as messed up as we are, then I can’t help but thinking that is because in God’s eyes your organization is on an equal footing as our organizations.

BTW NonChristians have these same expectations of us as Christians in relationship to them, and I for one can not fault them for having these expectations. We should somehow be positively different from them.

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

This is easy. The true church is the Protestant Episcopal Chuch in the United States of America…:hey_bud: