Posted on 12/30/2011 7:07:29 PM PST by rzman21
Generally a good article. The problem most Protestants need to deal with after Luther appeared on the scene is, Where was the Church of Christ before 1520 or thereabouts? It was there at the time of the Apostles, but did it then just vanish for a millennium and a half?
Anglicans and some others talk about the “Church Invisible,” but it’s a kind of a vague, mystical idea.
So, that pretty much makes it either the Orthodox Church or the Catholic Church. Which of them split off from the other? If you go by the numbers, then it was the Orthodox Church that split off in the Great Schism.
My conclusion, when I decided that the Anglican Church didn’t qualify as the one, true, universal Church of Christ, was that it was the Catholic Church that shows the obvious signs of having been the Church Universal since its founding by Christ.
Nice try by a non-Christian.
Protestants should at least concede a point which Martin Luther, their religion’s founder, also conceded, namely, that the Catholic Church safeguarded and identified the Bible: "We are obliged to yield many things to the Catholics – (for example), that they possess the Word of God, which we received from them; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it." (21)
21. Commentary on John, chapter 16, as cited in Paul Stenhouse’s Catholic Answers to "Bible" Christians (Kensington: Chevalier Press, 1993), p. 31.
My belief based on my reading is that the East-West Schism was not a one-time event. It was a gradual development due to hard-headed and hard hearted people on both sides.
Intermittent communion between various Orthodox patriarchates and bishoprics continued all the way until 1729 when Pope Benedict XIII solidified the schism in the Patriarchate of Antioch.
I’m a Melkite, so I know a bit of this history.
The Greeks in Constantinople retaliated by decreeing that all Roman Catholic and Protestant baptisms were invalid.
True but it tells of the early gathering of people i.e the church. The word church means “an assembly, a company of people gathered together for a certain purpose. It is not a building. But going on, the NT is not a linear book just like the OT is not a linear book. During Acts all those letters that Paul and the Apostles wrote took place then.
This article was written by an Orthodox priest, not a Roman Catholic.
The church with its Apostles came first. The Apostles wrote the NT, or their close associates did, all under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
2,000 years later, the correct question would be, “Will the church LISTEN to scripture, or blow it off?”
Because what I think you are really trying to say is that the church you are part of gets to rule over scripture. But scripture is “God-breathed”, which sounds a bit more immediate to me than the status of a pope.
Accuser of the Brethren Ping
You didn’t REALLY mean that sarcastic, unChristian-like remark to Uriel .... DID you?
The word church means “an assembly, a company of people gathered together for a certain purpose. It is not a building.
>>Are you giving it a 21st century definition, or are you looking back at how the term was defined outside of scripture.
You can’t simply take a wooden reading of the Bible and impose preconceived notions on the particular text.
The question should be: Was Jesus visible, and if the Church is his body isn’t it also visible?
The problem with Evangelicalism is it starts with anti-Catholicism as the beginning of its scriptural interpretation rather than looking for clues how St. Paul or the other writers would have thought based on their cultural , linguistic, and other considerations.
The fact is you had a firm ecclesiastical hierarchy in place within 50 years of the Book of Acts. That’s not me talking. That is a historical fact.
Should we begin our history with interpreting scripture in the light of 16th century squabbles in the Western Church, or should we make an honest effort to start afresh when reading the Bible?
Uriel is not a Christian.
Read up on Ebionitism.
http://ebionite.com/
I think what galls most of us here is your holier than thou attitude.
Some very good quotes from scripture have been given here so far and you've ignored God's word and chastened the messenger.
WHY should one listen to YOU if you, yourself will not heed the Word of God for your own bigotted doctrine?
If it weren’t for the testimonies of the Church Fathers against the Gnostic heretics and others you wouldn’t know the New Testament was God-breathed, so be thankful.
To learn to debate ?
Yes, of course the history was more complicated, although there were a few basic points on which there was disagreement.
“Filioque” in the Nicene Creed.
Emperor vs. Pope.
Significant to my mind is that the Roman Catholic Church is decidedly a world church, whereas the Orthodox Church has pretty much been confined to the East, with a few rather thin branches in other places.
But for the most part, the Catholic Church has said that the Orthodox Church is, well, orthodox and has an apostolic succession and legitimate sacraments. Just a few minor disagreements and refusals, which, unfortunately, have persisted.
“Protestants should at least concede a point which Martin Luther, their religion’s founder, also conceded, namely, that the Catholic Church safeguarded and identified the Bible: “We are obliged to yield many things to the Catholics – (for example), that they possess the Word of God, which we received from them; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it.” (21)
This Pentacostal agrees. I also understand why, in the dark ages and medieval church, sacraments were necessary—many priests were not literate and something that could be memorized and repeated over and over preserved portions of the Word until God’s Word was released again on the world. I believe God’s plan used the Catholic Church, even the comfy power structure it became, to preserve the Word thru a time when it could have been swallowed in paganism. I also believe I will spend eternity on God’s new Earth with many Catholics.
At the same time, the Bible, translated into ordinary languages and distributed via printing press was a time-bomb (preserved by the Catholic Church) that went off in their own hands. There’s a reason the Catholic Church fought translation of the Bible from Latin so vigorously.
Sola Scriptura, imho, goes too far. The Holy Spirit is still with us and guides us. But scripture is a standard that is immutable and all revelation and “tradition” must be judged against scripture. The Bible, imho, shone the light on much of the pagan and political dross that accumulated after the church became part of the State post Constantine. The empirical evidence of history is overwhelming that the Catholic Church has been an institution lead by men, not by God’s infallible representative on Earth.
Ducking now :)
I think God can protect Himself just fine. He did OK with the Old Testament. And amigo, the Church Fathers were all over the board, and the ‘Fathers’ acknowledged scripture - they did not determine it.
It is my sincere belief that when approaching the Bible one is approaching the literal Word of God.
To interpreret such is akin to that of approaching the Throne of God, i.e., w/out overt genuflectrions.
It is stated in Hebrews that the World of God is ‘alive’ and able to divide asunder the spirit & soul.
Good luck on doing that these days. I guess that is pretty easy when examining Isa 40.
True, the Church came first, because the Gospels were written much later. We had a whole section at my church devoted to early believers. That is A.D. 33-250. They didn’t have texts to refer to. In fact most people besides those in the clergy were illiterate. But we discussed just how powerful their faith was, even to the point of being killed for believing in Jesus. We talked about how powerful their faith must have been, being based on first hand, and even fourth hand accounts of who Christ was. Imagine listening to Peter tell thousands of people about Jesus. It would have been overwhelming. Acts describes Peter doing things that even Jesus didn’t do, like curing people who simply had his shadow pass over them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.