Posted on 06/13/2013 10:02:02 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
I have a few questions for you about the "OPC." First, do you teach apostolic succession, and, if so, do you believe ministers outside of the OPC are not really ministers? Second, do you believe that the "gifts of the Holy Spirit" are for today, i.e., are healing, tongues, prophetic revelation, and miracles as led by the Holy Spirit actively manifest in our modern churches? Finally, how are you different from the Roman Catholic Church?
Thank you for your questions. Let me take them one at a time.
1. "Do you teach apostolic succession, and, if so, do you believe ministers outside of the OPC are not really ministers?"
It is helpful to distinguish between "apostolic succession" and "apostolicity." By the doctrine of apostolic succession the Roman Catholic Church asserts its claim of an uninterrupted and continuous line of succession extending from the twelve apostles through the bishops they ordained right up to the bishops of the present day. According to this doctrine, the apostles appointed the first bishops as their successors, granting to them their own teaching authority, which continues until the end of the age (see paragraph 77 of Catechism of the Catholic Church).
Let me direct you to other relevant passages of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The significance of the Roman Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession is immediately apparent in its definition of a "particular church." A particular church "refers to a community of the Christian faithful in communion of faith and sacraments with their bishop ordained in apostolic succession" (paragraph 833). "[I]t is for bishops as the successors of the apostles to hand on the 'gift of the Spirit,' the 'apostolic line'" (paragraph 1576). Without apostolic succession there is no church.
In close connection with the idea of apostolic succession is the transmission from generation to generation of the "Tradition." By Tradition, Catholics refer to that part of the church's "doctrine, life, and worship" that is distinct from Scripture (paragraph 78). This Tradition, Catholics argue, does not contradict Scripture, and maintains faithfully the unwritten but authoritative teachings and traditions of the apostles and early church fathers. Tradition is to be believed by the members of the church. It is the apostolic succession of bishops that perpetuates and guarantees both the faithful teaching of Scripture and Tradition.
Protestants have reacted strongly against the doctrine of apostolic succession. They have done so in a number of ways, historical and theological. One of these ways is by affirming the apostolicity of the church. Apostolicity may be defined as receiving and obeying apostolic doctrine as it is set forth in the New Testament. In matters of doctrine and life, Protestants permit no ultimate appeal to traditions that are distinct from canonical Scripture. For example, the Westminster Confession of Faith 1.10 says this:
The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.
Absolutely no provision is made for an authoritative, unwritten tradition. In fact, it is to the touchstone of Scripture that all traditions, including those of Roman Catholicism, must be brought.
Protestants have correctly observed that it is the appeal to Tradition that has made possible many doctrines and practices of Roman Catholicism that have no basis in Scripture. These include (to name only a handful) the papacy, papal infallibility, purgatory, the mass, the immaculate conception, and the assumption of Mary.
Even if it were historically provable that there was an unbroken succession of bishops from the first century to the present day Roman Catholic bishops (and it is not), Protestants would still demur to claims of Roman authority based upon apostolic succession. It is the apostolicity of the church that counts. And it is precisely by the standard of apostolicity that the Roman Catholic Church is measured and found wanting.
The Orthodox Presbyterian Church recognizes as ministers those men ordained to that office by true churches, which are identified by the attribute of apostolicity.
2. "Do you believe that the 'gifts of the Holy Spirit' are for today, i.e., are healing, tongues, prophetic revelation, and miracles as led by the Holy Spirit actively manifest in our modern churches?"
Orthodox Presbyterian are cessationists with regard to the word gifts. For a very careful exposition of scriptural teaching regarding the word gifts and healing, I refer you to the Orthodox Presbyterian Church's "Report of the Committee on the Baptism and Gifts of the Holy Spirit," which may be retrieved at http://opc.org/GA/giftsHS.html.
3. "How is the Orthodox Presbyterian Church different from the Roman Catholic Church?"
Thousands of books and articles have been written that carefully distinguish between Roman Catholicism and churches, like the OPC, which belong to the historic Protestant tradition. Please permit me to point you to two articles that will assist you in your studies.
I recommend "Resolutions for Roman Catholic & Evangelical Dialogue," which may be retrieved at http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=articledisplay&var1=ArtRead&var2=876&var3=authorbio&var4=AutRes&var5=1. This statement is quite short, but points to a number of crucial differences between historic Protestants and Catholics.
Michael Horton has written an excellent article pointing to the differences between historic Protestants and Catholics on the doctrine of justification. "Justification, Vital Now & Always" may be retrieved at
http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID597662|CIID1415598,00.html.
Let me also suggest a brief survey of the history and beliefs of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, which may be retrieved at http://opc.org/what_is/the_opc.html.
While the differences between the Roman Catholic Church and historic Protestantism are many, let me focus on the one difference that must always be kept in mind, namely, the issue of authority. In every debate between Roman Catholics and historic Protestants, whether it be over the nature of the papacy, the place of tradition, justification, the role of Mary, the sacraments, or any other disputed matter, the question of authority will always surface. By what standard are matters of religious controversy judged? Historic Protestants will appeal to the Bible as the final authority in all matters of Christian faith and practice.
Roman Catholics, on the other hand, appeal to Scripture and Tradition as authoritatively interpreted by the papacy and its courts. The >i>Catechism of the Catholic Church claims this:
The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock. "The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head." This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church's very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope. The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful." "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered' (paragraphs 881-882).
People often express surprise at the broad differences between Roman Catholics and historic Protestants. The differences are not only understandable, but also necessary, when examined from the standpoint of authority. As long as Protestants and Catholics appeal to two different authorities, an unbridgeable gulf separates them.
The Westminster Confession of Faith states clearly the historic Protestant position on the question of authority:
The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. (Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.6).
The additions to which the authors of the Confession refer include not only the traditions of the papacy, but also the papal institution itself. The source of the irreconcilable differences between the Roman Catholic Church and historic Protestantism rests here. Reconciliation between historic Protestants and Roman Catholics would require either that Catholics abandon the papacy and its traditions, or that Protestants surrender their bedrock conviction that Scripture is the only infallible rule of faith and practice. The issue of authority leaves no room for compromise.
Given that the Church in Rome was founded by St. Peter, I can’t see it.
Yes mother.
Will say this again...Unity among believers is in Christ Jesus....regardless of their denomination or church association....who leads or who they call themselves.
But I will surely differ with you...there are many differences among the catholic churches....indeed. I would venture saying most catholic denominations do not agree with their gay bishops...nor with the the leaders who include voodoo and various other rites within their denomination..and fully credited by the leadership of the catholic denominations.
Don’t believe I’m old enough, but :::headpat::::
<....”So how does one determine this?”.....>
Right question!..one you would not be asking were you connected to those who do know how to determine this.
DO you have a special brand of candy? That way we can be sure to know the ‘real’ christians from the fake ones.
“Right question!..one you would not be asking were you connected to those who do know how to determine this.”
If you had the answer you would be able to answer the question.
So what is it Caww? How does one determine this?
Now Catherine of Aragon...be careful accepting the Mother role...I understand catholics see Mary as their mother in charge.
Are you or are you not in unity with fellow protestan Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson?
I normally avoid these discussions as people do not focus on the correct things that make a church the church. However this needs to be addressed, if nothing else as a way to stop you from slandering everyone.
"Vicky" Is not a Christian. it's a self proclaimed homosexual. The two are mutually incompatible.
Protestants are no more in unity with them than Pope Francis is just another homosexual priest molesting altar boys.
Now, are those faggot priests who molested all those kids Catholics? or have they turned their back on God and the church they supposedly belonged to and excommunicated themselves?
So if you can tar all protestants with a faggot non-Christian, then you can be tarred with those faggot child molestors.
Get on to the real issue. We are not called to be Protestant or to be Catholic. We are called to be Christian. You don't have to be a member of any certain church (as all Christians together form the one true Church).
Do you, JCBrekenridge, believe the Jesus is the Son of God and that He suffered, died, was buried and rose again in payment of your sins, and have you accepted that atonement for your sins. Have you made Jesus YOUR Savior? If so, then we are brothers in Christ no matter what church you attend. If not you need to get saved, hell is too hot and eternity lasts too long to play around with this.
The bible never once asks what church someone belongs to, only WHO they belong to. (that is, salvation is an individual issue, not a communal issue)
So, we can continue pissing on each other with trivial and unimportant questions ("My steeple's taller than your steeple". "My 'church' was founded before yours was" etc) or we can get out there and make the world a better place by bringing souls to Jesus.
“Your definition of “Apostasy” is hypertechnical”
It’s the correct definition. Apostasy refers to doctrine not the conduct of the members.
“One can Apostatize by continued sin”
One can personally apostasize through sin, yes, but has already been explained, the Church cannot.
“The Catholic Church through the Counter Reformation implicitly recognized its organizational sin and reformed.”
Yes and the organizational sin was not a doctrinal apostasy. They reaffirmed what had always been taught and went forwards. This is contrary to the protestants who committed doctrinal sins and apostasised.
“It is a great question whether or not God recognized its reformation.”
Alright, let me ask you a question.
If I were to prove to you that every protestant church does not teach today what they once taught previously, would you believe that protestants have apostasised?
(”My steeple’s taller than your steeple”. “My ‘church’ was founded before yours was” etc)
You omitted “my church was founded by Jesus” v “my church was founded by a bipolar German monk” v “my church was founded by a murderous king”
Spiritual things are spiritually discened.
The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
A natural man’s understanding is shut to them,...must be opened by a divine power,.... and a superior spiritual light must be thrown into it;.....at most he can only know the literal and grammatical sense of them,....or only in the theory,... notionally...and speculatively,.... not experimentally, spiritually, and savingly.
’ “Vicky” Is not a Christian.’ “
Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson claims to be a Christian.
“Protestants are no more in unity with them”
He is a Protestant. Many protestants are in unity with him. I gave a list. The ECLA, the ECUSA, the PCUSA and the UMC are all in unity with Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson. All of these organizations believe that he is a representative of Christ here on earth.
All of these organizations are protestant.
So tell me. How does one determine who is protestant and who is not? Is Vicky correct or are you correct? This is the question I asked right out of the gate.
What is the essential definition of ‘protestant’?
So far, I see only one and it applies equally to you as to Bishop Gene Robinson - you define yourself as ‘not Catholic’. Through boolean logic.
There is no unity on doctrine. I can point to any doctrine and find someone who is a protestant who disagrees. This renders the concept of Christian ‘unity’ a lie. There is no unity among Protestant Christians.
“So if you can tar all protestants with a faggot non-Christian”
He says he’s a Christian. He has made his profession of faith in public, and his personal testimony. Many, many, many other protestants agree with him and not you.
“Get on to the real issue. We are not called to be Protestant or to be Catholic. We are called to be Christian. You don’t have to be a member of any certain church (as all Christians together form the one true Church).”
So what you are saying is it doesn’t matter if you are a member of Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson’s church. It’s all ok, because he and his members form the true church.
“Do you, JCBrekenridge, believe the Jesus is the Son of God and that He suffered, died, was buried and rose again in payment of your sins, and have you accepted that atonement for your sins. Have you made Jesus YOUR Savior?”
I can no more make him my saviour than I can make my father my father. He IS my saviour and has always been my saviour. I can only acknowledge that which is true. He suffered and died and redeemed all of us from the Cross.
“If so, then we are brothers in Christ no matter what church you attend. If not you need to get saved, hell is too hot and eternity lasts too long to play around with this.”
That was what I was asking. I know I have a somewhat flippant tone - but this is a crucial question.
Now I have one for you - what do you think of the Nicene Creed? This is where your formula originates.
“The bible never once asks what church”
Nonsense. The Bible explicitly states that Christ built his Church to proclaim the gospel to all nations.
“with trivial and unimportant questions”
It’s not trivial. That’s my point. Visible Christian unity is very, very important, even more so given folks like Vicky Gene Robinson.
We need all the faithful Christians who remain true to Christs teachings in unity with one another and not with Vicky.
It’s not about ‘making the world a better place’. This world is doomed. The boat is sinking and we have to swim.
“Spiritual things are spiritually discened.”
Not scripture.
“The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
Also not scripture.
“A natural man’s understanding is shut to them,...must be opened by a divine power,.... and a superior spiritual light must be thrown into it;.....at most he can only know the literal and grammatical sense of them,....or only in the theory,... notionally...and speculatively,.... not experimentally, spiritually, and savingly.”
Also not scripture either.
Jesus provides a concrete answer to this question:
Matthew 7:16-20
“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.”
Now is it a coincidence that God commands man to ‘be fruitful and multiply - fill the earth and subdue it?’
Like Jesus says - by their ‘fruits’ you shall know them. These are not two separate issues they are one and the same.
Nice try.
There’s a reason the ECUSA is at the vanguard of these changes. I wonder if any of the other freepers can see it.
Actually you missed it and the point.....but not surprisingly so.
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.