Skip to comments.A Brief Catechism for Adults - Lesson 16: The Catholic Church is the Only True Church
Posted on 07/31/2007 4:19:37 PM PDT by NYer
|Name of church||Founder||When||Where|
|Episcopalian||King Henry VIII||1534||England|
|Adventist||William Miller||1831||New York|
|Christian Scientist||Mary Baker Eddy||1879||Massachusetts|
Lesson 16 of 43.
So in Catholics view, should you obey the Church over Christ, The Word?
Would this be the same church that burned John Huss at the stake? Or is it the same church that can’t seem to discipline Cardinal Law? Or the same church that countenanced “Mary, I’m yours” as a papal banner? I know there are many good Catholic Christians, but to call this institution the only true church is to do a disservice to all those servants of Christ who march on in His name in other vineyards. This is Romanist Supremicism.
The Catholic Church is the Only True Church
[I'm sure the Orthodox might have a point or two they would want to contend.]
This is not a winnable argument, it is fractious and arrogant and about a generally welcome as a fart in a funeral.
Therefore, since I'm not at all interested in getting in a holy hand grenade tossing contest:
I am resolved to know nothing while I am here with you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. (ref 1 Cor 2:2)
If you have read through this post in its entirety, then you recognize that Christ established one Church and gave His authority to His disciples to rule and teach. His word is carried on through that Church:
"He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me; and he that despiseth Me, despiseth Him that sent Me."
He never commanded anyone to write down His words. Everyone must obey the Catholic Church because She alone has the authority of Jesus to rule and to teach.
Jesus promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church. He did not promise that its members would be free from sin. They are human, like you and me. In its 2000 year history, despite some bad priests, bishops, cardinals and even bad popes, not one pope has ever erred in doctrine! That is testimony to the gift of the Holy Spirit that guides the Church through time. No other human institution or government has survived 2000 years! The life expectancy of most protestant sects is 200 years, at most, before it begins to split and divide.
“His word is carried on through that Church:”
Which is CHRISTIANITY, NOT THE ROMAN VERSION ALONE!
Any church founded by a true disciple (regardless of era) is a true church of Christ! Many predate the Roman church! (Eg: Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Coptic) So, knock it off already!
Climb off your high horses, and repent you of your arrogance!
Uh, Christians have been in Rome since before Paul wrote his letter to the Romans.
There were Christians in Jerusalem, Damascus, Antioch, Corinth, Alexandria, etc, before there were any in Rome. Your comment is ridiculous!
“Does everyone have to obey the Catholic Church?
Yes, because She alone has the authority of Jesus to rule and to teach.
To disobey the Catholic Church knowingly is just as much a sin as to disobey Jesus Christ or His Apostles.”
Arrogant words such as these have started wars in the past. Shame on whoever uttered them.
The Church is Christ. They are one. Christ is at the head, we are the members of His Body.
Moreover, The Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church in her Magisterial (Teaching and Sacramental) Role. This the belief of the Catholic Church: that the descendants of the Apostles (bishops) receive anointing by and through the Holy Spirit to transmit unaltered the Truths that Christ revealed and to continue the Church through the ages by ministering the Sacrament of Orders, established by Christ at the Last Supper.
All the Sacraments are direct actions of Christ Himself working through those whom He anoints through the power of the Holy Spirit.
In short, to claim the Church is merely an earthly institution and not His own gift to those whom He has called is to deny all that Christ taught. It is disingenuous to claim that a thing called the Bible transmits truth more authentically than persons anointed in Christ to teach what the Bible contains.
One thing I’d like a Protestant to prove: That the Bible is the Word of God. How could you know? (Quoting the Bible to prove it’s own authenticity really proves nothing.)
Do the Catholic, Orthodox and Oriental Churches recognize the Anglican Church as Apostolic?
“It is disingenuous to claim that a thing called the Bible transmits truth more authentically than persons anointed in Christ to teach what the Bible contains.”
Shame on those Bereans.
“One thing Id like a Protestant to prove: That the Bible is the Word of God. How could you know? (Quoting the Bible to prove its own authenticity really proves nothing.)”
Easy, through the prompting of the Holy Spirit.
I assume most RC's, as with most denominations, stop their catechism training with this kind of "short" or "brief" catechism. Am I wrong?
Did the people have to obey the Apostles? Yes, because they spoke with the authority of Jesus, and therefore, to disobey them would be a sin. "He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me; and he that despiseth Me, despiseth Him that sent Me." (Luke 10:16) Did the authority of the Apostles die with them? No, they handed down their authority to others, since Jesus instituted His Church to last until the end of the World. Some of the men who received authority from the Apostles: Matthias (Acts 1:22), Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:2), Timothy, Silas, Sylvanus, Titus, Luke, Mark (Acts 17:14; 2 Corinthians 1:19; 2 Timothy 14:11) Which Church today has the same authority? The Catholic Church, because it is the only Church established by Jesus Christ.
A simply amazing jump from "The Apostles" to "The Catholic Church". Forget the poo-pooing of their validity (for now), they are more talking points than catechism. Again:
Name the founders of other leading Protestant churches. Name of church Founder When Where Episcopalian King Henry VIII 1534 England Presbyterian John Knox 1560 Scotland Congregationalist Robert Browne 1583 England Baptist John Smith 1600 Holland Methodist John Wesley 1739 England Adventist William Miller 1831 New York Christian Scientist Mary Baker Eddy 1879 Massachusetts
An 8-10yr Sunday School student should fail a Church History test with these answers.
Do "cradle catholics" get better catechism at a later point?
Pope Leo XIII’s Apostolicae Curae (1896) declared the Anglican apostolic succession invalid.
If there was such a Christian church in England, it was long gone by the time Pope Gregory sent missionaries to the Angles. The Celts were driven out of England by successive waves of invaders.
The English claim for precedence over the French and Spanish was political in origin, and the Joseph of Arimathea legend was pressed into service of that claim. Sadly, it has no basis in fact.
But the Episcopalians right this minute are claiming that the Holy Spirit has led them to consecrate practicing homosexuals as bishops and 'bless' homosexual partnerships. The Holy Spirit has led them to reinterpret Scripture so that the proscriptions against homosexuality in the Bible are only against "temple prostitution."
How do we distinguish valid promptings of the Holy Spirit from promptings by Something Else, or from maliciously or negligently fraudulent claims of promptings of the Holy Spirit?
But what you said was wrong, and I was correcting the record.
That’s what I thought. Rome did consider them apostolic for a long time, right? Did the other apostolic Churches quit considering them apostolic at the same time or what?
Wrong, on both counts.
The Eastern Orthodox and Coptic doesn't predate Christianity in Rome. They both date from the Apostles. The Anglican Church was created with Henry VIII's schism.
In 1555, after Queen Mary's accession to the throne and the return of England to Catholicism, Pope Paul IV issued the Bull Praeclara Charissimi, directing that "those who have been promoted to ecclesiastical Orders . . . by any one but a Bishop validly and lawfully ordained are bound to receive those Orders again." Apostolicae Curae also notes that converting priests were reordained in the 17th and 18th centuries, thus indicating that their orders were not valid.
I believe it sort of came and went. Henry took the English out of the Church, but then when Bloody Mary got in she took them back, then James took them out again, for good. The bishops that joined Henry were validly consecrated bishops. Therefore, in my understanding, those they ordained were validly (but illicitly) done. However, Leo XIII declared that they were indeed INVALID, due to defects in the form of ordination.
So, yes, for centuries, apparently, they were considered schismatics, but validly ordained. One hundred eleven years ago, that was overturned.
It’s interesting that this was just about the time that the C of E stoppped persecuting Catholics and allowed them to have their own churches.
You explain things so well. Thank you.
I don’t think the Episcopalians believe that the Bible is really God’s word. I had a female Episcopalian priest(ess) illustrate their “3 legged stool” approach to religion and downplayed the Bible in a discussion about homosexuality back in 1998.
“How do we distinguish valid promptings of the Holy Spirit from promptings by Something Else, or from maliciously or negligently fraudulent claims of promptings of the Holy Spirit?”
It’s pretty easy to tell if someone is being genuine to their own religion or using touchy-feeley language to rationalize their position. Squirming around direct Bible verses is your first hint.
Apparently not the only disease!
That hierarchy you condemn was set up by Christ Himself with the Apostles. Ecclesiastical egalitarianism lead to societal egalitarianism, and we know what the fruits of societal egalitarianism are.
Wow!! You guys rock! Thanks very much fer taking time to help a less edjumcated Catholic out!
John 6:48 et seq. is a usual suspect.
What is the authority for distinguishing interpretation from ill-intended parsing?
“Arrogant words such as these have started wars in the past. Shame on whoever uttered them.”
I’m pretty lenient with people claiming their way is the only way. I consider Catholicism a different religion from Christianity, and it is their right to make claims to their superiority, and back it up with what they wish. There are quite a few groups who make exclusivity claims on Jesus, including Mormonism and Islam.
They're sure more Christian than the Episcopalians right now . . . maybe that's damning with faint praise, but it sure was nice to get into a Bible-believing, Christ-centered church! I haven't noticed any absence of Christianity in my new parish -- our priests preach the Gospel and "Jesus Christ, and Him crucified."
I realize you have limited years, but do you really believe that the church in Rome was founded before those in Jerusalem, Thessaloniki, Corinth, Antioch, and Damascus??? If you do, I encourage you to diligently reread the new testament.
See post #18. Henry VIII created the Church of England, NOT the ANGLICAN Church.
Well, to be fair, most of the Episcopalians I knew and know are true believers and followers of Jesus Christ too... They aren’t required to hold to the doctrines that their church leadership emits. But they just flat won’t take a stand on anything!
Have you read The Venerable Bede (d. 735)'s Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum, the Ecclesiastical History of the English (or as it's sometimes translated, History of the Church and People of England)? He's considered the authoritative early source, and there's not word one about Joseph of Arimathea.
That's because the legend of his founding Glastonbury is very late in origin and all tied up with the political claims of England to be first among the Catholic nations of Europe. There was a very interesting book written about 20 years ago summarizing the claims of England to primacy, I think the title was Our Lady's Dowry. If I recall correctly, these claims started surfacing about the time England got down to some serious warfare with France, some time in the 14th century.
Episcopagan?! BAH!!! Catholics are the only true goddess worshippers in these here parts! (shakes rosary in agitated manner)
I didn't make your age, whatever it is, an issue. Why are you? I am not talking about your post #14. I'm talking about what you said in #11. There is one Church of Christ, which was established at Jerusalem. As the Apostles converted people and traveled, the one Church established communities wherever the believers who follow the faith of the Apostles were. While the community in Rome started after the commmunities elsewhere, St. Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, came to Rome to become the leader of the community there. His successors have the same primacy as St. Peter did.
The worldwide Anglican Communion has been unable to discipline or expel the Americans, and it appears at this point that the Anglican Communion as such will cease to exist on or after September 30 of this year.
As a refugee from that dreadful excuse for a church who should have shaken the dust from my sandals long before the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire, I am sadly familiar with all the details of the controversy. At least now I am watching the train wreck from a safe vantage point across the Tiber, rather than being in one of the passenger cars.
You'll get no argument from me on your final point -- the ECUSA leadership is trying to please the World, the Flesh, and the Devil.
As for why the Episcopagans have come up in this discussion, they illustrate just exactly what you can get away with by claiming Holy Spirit-guided Scriptural interpretation when there is no authoritative leadership. Without a final arbiter other than the internal promptings of the Spirit, once a particular interpretation reaches critical mass in a denomination, that denomination is off on a wild ride to wherever.
First, I think somebody has missed the Seven Letters to the Seven Churches in Revelation. Were those churches NOT Christ's true churches? Furthermore, the bible is the final authority of Christ's truth, NOT the church doctrine!
Concering the bible as the provable true Word of God, all you have to do is look at what Christ Jesus himself quoted.
There are things interwoven throughtout the scripture that more than prove it's God's word, where do you want to start? You have know idea how good of a question you have asked!!
Oy, weh! (cringing as large heavy rosary strikes her about the head and shoulders)
|Disclaimer: The post made herewith is for the purposes of information and discussion only and is not to be interpreted, read, or construed as intended to induce, invite, cajole, compel, or influence in any manner whatsoever any person of whatever Confession reading the aforesaid post or participating in the aforesaid discussion to join, attend, inquire, contemplate, believe, or concur with the Catholic Church, including those Churches and/or Rites in union with the Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City, and Servant of the Servants of God of the Church aforesaid. The party/ies posting disclaim, reject, and abjure responsibility to said persons, Free Republic, and/or its Moderators for any Acts of God by which the Holy Spirit or another Person of the Holy Trinity induces, persuades, or influences the persons aforesaid to seek such information on their own accord through Divine Intervention or by the process hereby denominated "sanctifying grace." The party/ies posting warrant that this is not his/her responsibility or intent and arises from a Power that cannot be controlled by him or her in this life or hereafter. This disclaimer cannot be revoked as it is not governed by the civil or criminal, statutory or common law of the United States of America or any other governmental entity and is the sole responsibility of Divine Intervention.|