Replies

You keep on harping on this issue, X, because truth hurts. The Pope's document is no different than Dominus Iesu from the year 2000. It says that Orthodox Churches are real churches but "lack" the fullness of being in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

We Orthodox agree, and state that the Western Church lacks the fullness of being in communion with the Eastern Patriarchs. Either way, the Church lacks unity. But that's not the same as saying that the Church in the west or in the east is not a real Church.

Our clergy is valid, our sacraments are valid, and apostolic succession is present, our Eucharist is Real Presence. We do not commune—within the Church—because we have not worked out full understanding of our dogmatic pronouncements. Communion is an expression of theological agreement and not means towards achieving one.

Whether you accept apostolic succession or not it makes no difference. Christ established one Church and it's none of the Protestant/Baptist man-made communities. We know that because we have the names of those who made them and the dates when they were made. Not a single one involves our Lord Jesus Christ, or goes back to 33 AD, except one both Greek and Latin, both catholic in scope and orthodox in faith, and both apostolic in authoirty.

If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex- monk of the Catholic Church, in the year 1517.
If you belong to the Church of England, your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the Pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.
If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded by John Knox in Scotland in the year 1560.
If you are a Protestant Episcopalian, your religion was an offshoot of the Church of England founded by Samuel Seabury in the American colonies in the 17th century.
If you are a Congregationalist, your religion was originated by Robert Brown in Holland in 1582.
If you are a Methodist, your religion was launched by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.
If you are a Unitarian, Theophilus Lindley founded your church in London in 1774.
If you are a Mormon (Latter Day Saints), Joseph Smith started your religion in Palmyra, N.Y., in 1829.
If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1605.
If you are of the Dutch Reformed church, you recognize Michaelis Jones as founder, because he originated your religion in New York in 1628.
If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.
If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year in which your religion was born and to Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy as its founder.
If you belong to one of the religious organizations known as 'Church of the Nazarene," "Pentecostal Gospel." "Holiness Church," "Pilgrim Holiness Church," "Jehovah's Witnesses," your religion is one of the hundreds of new sects founded by men within the past century.

This makes the oldest non-Apostolic "church" about 550 years old, circa 1500 years after the Lord established His. Take your pick.

If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded Chirst.
If you belong to the Church of England, your religion was founded by Christ.
If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded by Christ.
If you are a Protestant Episcopalian, your religion was founded by Christ.
If you are a Congregationalist, your religion was founed by Christ.
If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by Christ.
If you are a Unitarian, Theophilus Lindley founded your church in London in 1774.
If you are a Mormon (Latter Day Saints), Joseph Smith started your religion in Palmyra, N.Y., in 1829.
If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion Christ.
If you are of the Dutch Reformed church, your religion was founded by Christ
If you worship with the Salvation Army, your religion was founded by Christ.
If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year in which your religion was born and to Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy as its founder.
If you belong to one of the religious organizations known as 'Church of the Nazarene," "Pentecostal Gospel." "Holiness Church," "Pilgrim Holiness Church," "Jehovah's Witnesses," your religion was founded by Christ.

This makes the oldest non-Apostolic "church" about 550 years old, circa 1500 years after the Lord established His. Take your pick.

You seem to be glossing over the fact that, at least in the case of the Reformed Protestant churches, they view themselves as the continuation of Christ's church on Earth in the face of the institutional apostasy of the Roman Catholic Church. They recognize the prior 1500 years of church history as extremely relevant and valuable (unlike groups such as the Restorationists who wanted to discard the previous centuries of Christian history and all its lessons learned). OTOH, the Roman Catholic view of the nature of the visible, institutional church is self-referential and self-reinforcing.

When it comes down to it, the claim to apostolic succession is no more valid or meaningful than that of the Pharisees and Sadducees of "We have Abraham as our father!"

Xzins, thank you for the post.

Kosta50, thanks for post #7.

Obviously Protestants aren't going to agree with the Pope and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's statement. While we share faith in Christ Jesus as true God and true Man, Savior and Redeemer of the human race (and I thank God that we do!), it would not be true ecumenism to "pretend" that we are all united on the points mentioned in the document. Actually the document does not set back ecumenism, it advances it in the sense that the Catholic Church is willing to put all Her cards on the table and talk about it. We believe what we believe because it has been handed down to us from the Apostles to this day.

I think that is why we are able to dialogue fruitfully with the Orthodox and that is, as Kosta50 pointed out, why we don't go to communion at each others churches--we have disagreements and we are dialoguing about them. Kosta50 and I both hope and pray for full communion between the various Catholic Churches soon.

Why is apostolic succession so important (and not just "spiritual succession")? It's not about bureaucracy, it's about valid Sacraments. If Jesus did not institute the Eucharist as His real presence and did not ordain the Apostles to "do THIS in my memory" and did not tell them "whose sins YOU forgive, they are forgiven", then the Protestants would be in the right: apostolic succession would not matter at all--just faith in Jesus. But if He did give Himself to us, flesh and blood, as the Bread of Life and set up a hierarchy and gave them power to forgive sins, then apostolic succession is most important even if their successors aren't so perfect. But the Apostles weren't perfect either, in fact one of them betrayed Our Divine Savior and many successors of the Apostles do so today (I'm not sure if it's one out of twelve today... it might be better or it might be worse!).

May the Lord give you His peace.

Which matters more in the Kingdom of God:

1) That a man belong to a great and well respected institution founded by an apostle two thousand years ago.

2) That a man has the Spirit of God dwelling in him.

My understanding is that God is no respecter of persons.

I suspect there are unsaved people in every denomination, as well as spirit filled servants of Christ in each one.

Is any of this against orthodox doctrine?

If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex- monk of the Catholic Church, in the year 1517.
etc.

Sonofagun! I found a site which copied your bullet points word for word.

How Old Is Your Church

And then they have the nerve to claim ownership of the material and post restrictions on it's usage without express approval.

Copyright in the pages, screens, text and images appearing at this site is owned by Eternal Word Television Network, Inc. or others as may be indicated in the textual presentation of the material. The information and materials contained at this site may not be copied, displayed, distributed, downloaded, licensed, modified, published, reposted, reproduced, reused, sold, transmitted, used to create a derivative work or otherwise used for public or commercial purposes without the express, written consent of EWTN.

PS. I am jerking your chain concerting EWTN's Terms of Usage. I have, and will use their material without permission. However; I will link to the site.

My very vibrant full-of-life church has rejected labels as misleading and in fact restrictive.

My pastor constantly says he likes and prefers to use the term “spirit-led” — and indeed I believe that’s what it is.

And that suits me just fine, as each week we delve into the Bible, both Old and New Testament where the message never ceases to amaze.

(I was brought up in a strict Baptist Church, and my current church was at one time labeled Pentecostal, although no one refers by that, I don’t think.)

I read the Bible, Sir. I study, and I pray. No man was given Divine Authority except the Son of Man.

My religion was founded in the City of David when the prophecies were made real and the Messiah was born.

Neither the Pope, nor my pastor, nor any other made of flesh is infallible. No election of men can determine or decide what is or is not Divine. No council of men can choose a man to speak for God.

Please, I beg of you and your bretheren of the Catholic faith - be mindful of dividing the Kingdom. Please, I beg you of Protestant faith - be mindful of dividing the Kingdom.

Do not place ‘church’ above scripture, do not place mortal flesh and sinful egos above The Word.