MONROEVILLE, Pa. - Clergy and lay members of the theologically conservative Pittsburgh diocese voted overwhelmingly Saturday to break from the liberal Episcopal Church, with which it differs on issues ranging from homosexuality to biblical teachings on salvation.
Assistant Bishop Henry Scriven said the vote means the Pittsburgh diocese is now more firmly aligned with the majority of the 77 million-member worldwide Anglican Communion, which is more conservative than the communion's 2.2 million-member U.S. church.
"I am delighted," Scriven said, "that what we have done today is bringing the Diocese of Pittsburgh back into the mainstream of worldwide Anglicanism."
The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, presiding bishop of the U.S. church, criticized the vote in a statement, saying, "There is room in this Church for all who desire to be members of it."
She also said schism is not an "honored tradition within Anglicanism" and is "frequently been seen as a more egregious error than charges of heresy."
The votes were 240 in favor of leaving the church and 102 against. Eight voters either abstained or cast disqualified ballots.
The Diocese of San Joaquin, based in Fresno, Calif., was the first to leave the national church, in 2006. Dioceses based in Quincy, Ill., and Fort Worth, Texas, also are set to vote next month on leaving.
The Pittsburgh diocese was led for 11 years by Bishop Robert Duncan. He was removed from office by the national church's House of Bishops last month.
Many who opposed the split said the national church erred by disciplining Duncan before the vote. The Rev. James Simons — pastor of one of at least 16 Pittsburgh-area churches that plan not to break away — said it "created enormous sympathy" for those voting to split.
Duncan is among the leaders of a national network of theological conservatives who are breaking away from the liberal denomination in a dispute over Scripture. The long-simmering debate, similar to others going on in the mainline Presbyterian, Methodist and Lutheran denominations, erupted in 2003, when Episcopalians consecrated the first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.
Clergy and lay members on both sides of the aisle were impassioned before Saturday's vote. Several opposed to splitting from the national church acknowledged disagreeing with its more liberal teachings — including a more "inclusive" salvation that doesn't rely on Christ's crucifixion alone. But many said staying in the church was the only way to remedy those teachings.
The Rev. Philip Wainwright, an Episcopal priest who opposed the split, said the personal salvation of those who remain in the national church is not compromised by its more liberal teachings, which can be changed only by remaining in the church.
"If the gates of hell cannot prevail against this church, then a gay bishop and those who consecrated him cannot, either," Wainwright said.
But those voting to leave argued they're not being extreme, just faithful to biblical teachings.
"The church became as gray as the culture," said Alison McFarland, who voted for the split. "Undefined Christianity became the problem, and now the church is indistinguishable from the world."
Pittsburgh diocesan spokesman, the Rev. Peter Frank, said the breakaway diocese is led by a standing committee that is formally expected to elect Duncan as its bishop in November.
The breakaway diocese will align with the like-minded Anglican Province of the Southern Cone in South America, which already recognizes Duncan as a bishop and has welcomed the San Joaquin diocese into its fold.
Conservatives like Duncan and the Pittsburgh diocese are in the minority of the U.S. church but constitute a majority in the Anglican Communion.
Duncan expects more than two-thirds of the Pittsburgh-area's 74 congregations to be part of the breakaway diocese. Some congregations may end up splitting themselves over the issue, Duncan said.
Simons said a standing committee governs the parishes that remain in the Episcopal Church and will probably select an interim bishop before the end of the year.
Still unsettled is who owns the property of parishes remaining in the church.
Duncan said some parish properties are owned by the diocese and others by the congregations, although the diocese may have invested money in some of those. Duncan has pledged to negotiate fairly with parishes that wish to remain in the national church; he and Simons said they hope to avoid litigation.
RSS
Chris,
If the RCC taught only Truth, then I would agree it is from God. But it, like all denominations I have seen, teach doctrines that go against the word of God. The difference for me is that RCC teaches doctrines I think make it harder to trust Christ. They put people, both dead and alive, before Christ. They re-establish the priesthood of the old testament that added to the words of God. They put the church tradition above the scripture.
Even what the church fathers taught need to be measured against Scripture. Where the fathers disagree with scripture, the fathers must be ignored.
believer,
Thanks, you too.
online, I've got you there, ha! Mine is the 1996 edition, have a great Lord's Day, believer.
That is funny . . . as soon as I read the title you posted, I rolled over to one of my book shelves and it too was there . . . . It is the Revised & Enlarged Edition, 1981. Do you have the same one?
online, I need to look at my own books more often, I went to "The History Of Christianity Through The Centuries" by Cairn and low and behold just about every thing you posted was there.
online, thanks, believer
believer,
The information came from the O Timothy Magazine which I receive; it is published by Way of Life Literature (Baptist ministry), Editor David W. Cloud. You can view the article yourself be viewing the Daily Articles Listing; see August 2008 under (The Church Fathers: A Door to Rome).
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/fbns-index/index2fbns.htm
He quotes directly from William.A. Jurgens, (The Faith of the Early Fathers). This same info can be found in the 8 volumes of History of the Christian Church, Philip Schaff, which I also have but it was much easier for me to access the internet instead of manually turning pages from these 8 volumes. Hope this helps,
Peace
online, what was your source document for all this info, please don't seeing this as questioning you, but I'd be interested in getting a copy for my own reading, thanks believer
9. He believed that the true interpretation of Scripture was derived from the declaration of church councils (Augustine, De Vera Religione, xxiv, p. 45).
10. He interpreted the early chapters of Genesis figuratively.
11. He taught that God has pre-ordained some for salvation and others for damnation and that the grace of God is irresistible for the true elect. By his own admission, John Calvin in the 16th century derived his TULIP theology on the (sovereignty of God) from Augustine. Calvin said: (If I were inclined to compile a whole volume from Augustine, I could easily show my readers, that I need no words but his) (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, chap. 22).
12. He taught the heresy of apostolic succession from Peter.
I believe it is you my friend who needs to come out and accept Gods Word as the only rule for faith and practice.
Augustine (354-430)
Augustine was polluted with many false doctrines and helped lay the foundation for the formation of the Roman Catholic Church. For this reason Rome has honored Augustine as one of the (doctors of the church.)
1. He was a persecutor and the father of the doctrine of persecution in the Catholic Church.
The historian Neander observed that Augustines teaching (contains the germ of the whole system of spiritual despotism, intolerance, and persecution, even to the court of the Inquisition.) He interpreted Luke 14:23 (compel them to come in) to mean that Christ required the churches to use force against heretics.
2. He was the father of a-millennialism, allegorizing Bible prophecy and teaching that the Catholic Church is the kingdom of God.
3. He taught that the sacraments are the means of saving grace.
4. He was one of the fathers of infant baptism. The council of Mela, in Numidia, A.D. 416, composed of merely fifteen persons and presided over by Augustine, decreed: (Also, it is the pleasure of the bishops in order that whoever denies that infants newly born of their mothers, are to be baptized or says that baptism is administered for the remission of their own sins, but not on account of original sin, delivered from Adam, and to be expiated by the laver of regeneration, BE ACCURSED) (Wall, The History of Infant Baptism, I, 265). Augustine thus taught that infants should be baptized and that the baptism took away their sin. He called all who rejected infant baptism (infidels and cursed).
5. He taught that Mary did not commit sin and promoted her worship. He believed Mary played a vital role in salvation (Augustine, Sermon 289, cited in Durant, The Story of Civilization, 1950, IV, p. 69).
6. He believed in purgatory.
7. He accepted the doctrine of (celibacy for priests) supporting the decree of Pope Siricius of 387 that ordered that any priest that married or refused to separate from his wife should be disciplined.
8. He exalted the authority of the church over that of the Bible, declaring, (I should not believe the gospel unless I were moved to do so by the authority of the Catholic Church) (quoted by John Paul II, Augustineum Hyponensem, Apostolic Letter, Aug. 28, 1986, www.cin.org/jp2.ency/augustin.html).
7. He believed that men’s souls are preexistent and that stars and planets possibly have souls. (In regard to the sun, however, and the moon and the stars, as to whether they are living beings or are without life, there is not clear tradition) (Origen, cited by W.A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers).
8. He believed that Jesus was a created being and not eternal. (He held an aberrant view on the nature of Christ, which gave rise to the later Arian heresy†(Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Origen). That Origen believed Jesus Christ had an origin is evident from this statement: “Secondly, that Jesus Christ Himself, who came, was born of the Father before all creatures; and after He had ministered to the Father in the creation of all things,--for through Him were all things made) (Origen, quoted by W.A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers).
9. He denied the bodily resurrection, claiming that the resurrection body is spherical, non-material, and does not have members. (He denied the tangible, physical nature of the resurrection body in clear contrast to the teaching of Scripture) (Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Origen). He was condemned by the Council of Constantinople on this count.
10. Origen allegorized the Bible saying, (The Scriptures have little use to those who understand them literally.) In this he was one of the fathers of the heretical amillennial method of prophetic interpretation, which was given further development by Augustine and later adopted by the Roman Catholic Church.
Here are a few more examples:
Origen (185-254)
Though he endured persecution and torture for the cause of Christ under the emperor Decius in 250, Origen was loaded with false teachings. Following are some of the strange heresies of Origen:
1. He denied the infallible inspiration of Scripture.
2. He rejected the literal history of the early chapters in Genesis and of Satan taking the Lord Jesus up to a high mountain and offering him the kingdoms of the world (Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Vol. III, p. 614). Durant quotes Origen: (Who is so foolish as to believe that God, like a husbandman, planted a garden in Eden, and placed in it a tree of life ... so that one who tasted of the fruit obtained life?)
3. He accepted infant baptism.
4. He taught baptismal regeneration and salvation by works. (After these points, it is taught also that the soul, having a substance and life proper to itself, shall, after its departure from this world, be rewarded according to its merits. It is destined to obtain either an inheritance of eternal life and blessedness, if its deeds shall have procured this for it, or to be delivered up to eternal fire and punishment, if the guilt of its crimes shall have brought it down to this) (Origen, cited by W.A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers).
5. He believed the Holy Spirit was possibly a created being of some sort. (In His case [that of the Holy Spirit], however, it is not clearly distinguished whether or not He was born or even whether He is or is not to be regarded as a Son of God) (Origen, cited by W.A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers).
6. He believed in a form of purgatory and universalism, denying the literal fire of hell and believing that even Satan would be saved eventually. (Now let us see what is meant by the threatening with eternal fire. ... It seems to be indicated by these words that every sinner kindles for himself the flame of his own fire and is not plunged into some fire which was kindled beforehand by someone else or which already existed before him. ... And when this dissolution and tearing asunder of the soul shall have been accomplished by means of the application of fire, no doubt it will afterwards be solidified into a firmer structure and into a restoration of itself) (Origen, cited by W.A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers).
chris, when you place your denomination at a more privileged status then other denominations your are calling members of other denominations 2nd class Christians regardless if that is your intent or not. As for the thousands issue, your original comment was that 1000s of Protestant PASTORS are coming to the catholic church, not simply Protestants but PASTORS. And if that were the case and I don't believe it is then why is there a shortage of priests?
(Let's do a comparison for a minute.)
I do not believe that the Protestant names that you gave in your post exemplify the best minds within historic Protestant circles; Jakes, Kennedy, Hagee, Robertson, and Meyers can hardly be recognized as being the best minds that represent historic Protestantism, that is my opinion; Jakes denies the trinity and the rest are somewhat comical in some of their beliefs, nevertheless, I will run with your comparison. Most conservative Protestants have stood upon Gods word throughout history and have written only to expound upon what has been written therein. I will admit that not all of them agreed with one another just as all of the church fathers did not agree with one another. However, they have not introduced extra biblical dogmas as some of the church fathers have done.
Here are few of many examples,
Ignatius (50-110)
Ignatius was the bishop of Antioch in the early second century. He was arrested in about A.D. 110 and sent to Rome for trial and martyrdom.
1. He taught that churches should have elders and a ruling bishop; in other words, he was exalting one bishop over another, whereas in scripture the terms (bishop and elder) refer to the same humble office in the assembly (Titus 1:5-7).
2. He taught that all churches are a part of one universal church.
3. He claimed that a church does not have authority to baptize or conduct the Lords Supper unless it has a bishop.
These relatively innocent errors helped prepare the way for more error in the next century.
Justin Martyr (100 – 165)
When Justin embraced Christianity, he held on to some of his pagan philosophy.
1. He interpreted the Scriptures allegorically and mystically.
2. He helped develop the idea of a (middle state) after death that was neither heaven nor hell. Eventually this doctrine became Romes purgatory.
Clement of Alexandria (150 – 230)
1. Clement headed the allegorizing school of Alexandria from 190 to 202. This school was founded by Pantaenus.
2. Clement intermingled the philosophy of Plato with Christianity.
3. He helped develop the doctrine of purgatory and believed that most men would eventually be saved.
How do we determine whether a church is teaching correct doctrine or not? The only infallible standard that Scripture says that we have is the Bible (Isaiah 8:20; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; Isaiah 40:8; 1 Peter 2:25; Galatians 1:6-9).
Third, the (first church) is the church that is recorded in the New Testament, especially in the Book of Acts and the Epistles of Paul. The New Testament church is the (original church) and the (one true church). We can know this because it is described, in great detail, in Scripture. The church, as recorded in the New Testament, is Gods pattern and foundation for His church.
Nowhere in the New Testament will you find the (one true church) doing any of the following: praying to Mary, praying to the saints, venerating Mary, submitting to a pope, having a select priesthood, baptizing an infant, passing on apostolic authority to successors of the apostles, the immaculate conception, purgatory, etc. .
If most of the core elements of the Roman Catholic Church were not practiced by the New Testament Church (the first church and one true church), how then can the Roman Catholic Church be the first church? A study of the New Testament will CLEARLY reveal that the Roman Catholic Church is NOT the same church as the church that is described in the New Testament. What it does teach is that one is to use Scriptures as the determining factor as to which church is preaching the truth and thus it is true to the first church.
msn,
(If you do value the Apostles and those disciples in the Bible, then you should leave your church immedediately and become Catholic . . .)
As in times past I will share with you once again why I cannot become a Roman Catholic again. First, the RCC teaches doctrines that simply cannot be proven from scripture. This is the primary reason why I believe that it is not the one true church despite her claims. This argument is also used by a number of different churches; the Greek Orthodox Church makes this claim as well as some Protestant denominations.
Having a pedigree of supposed apostolic succession or being able to trace a churchs roots back to the (first church) is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church. What is given are repeated comparisons between what false teachers teach and what the first church taught, as recorded in Scripture. Whether a church is the (true church) or not is determined by comparing its teachings and practices to that of the New Testament church, as recorded in Scripture.
For example, Paul does not set forth in his epistles the teaching that they were to follow the (first) organized church as a safeguard for the truth. Rather, he commits them to the safekeeping of (GOD and to the WORD of His grace (Acts 20:32). Thus, truth could be determined by depending upon God and (the word of His grace); Scripture cannot be broken, see John 10:35).
Second, dependence upon the Word of God, rather than following certain individual (founders) is seen as the basis of a true church; see Galatians 1:8-9, in which Paul states, (But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed). Thus, the basis for determining truth from error is not based upon even WHO it is that is teaching it, (we or an angel from heaven,) but whether it is the SAME GOSPEL that they had already received; and this gospel is recorded in Scripture.
Another example of this dependence upon the Word of God is found in 2 Peter. Peter begins by mentioning that we have a (more sure word) to depend upon than even hearing the voice of God from heaven as they did at Jesus transfiguration (2 Peter 1:16-21). This (more sure word) is the written Word of God. Peter later tells them again to be mindful of (the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets and the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior) (2 Peter 3:2).
Also, 400 Anglicans is just an example of one group. I said thousands have become Catholic. I only gave you one denomination, and there are thousands of your sects so just do the math.
Lutherans were second with around 300, Methodists were next and a lot of Pentecostals who came to the Charismatic Catholic movement. Then there are all the independent churches which I can't even number who chose to become Catholic.
Thousands, my friend, thousands.
Believer,
Again, I can state facts about the Catholic Church without saying that Protestants are "Second Class". It is not your fault, that there are divisions in the Church. This happened many years ago and there is equal responsibility between Protestants and Catholics.
While the sepparation of Christendom is sad, it does not diminish the fact that the Catholic church was founded by Christ on the Apostles and your churches are not. Those Churches of the Reformation have much Truth, much more available than newer sects.
When you have removed yourself from the only church that has Christ official authority to "Bind and Lose" and a petrine ministry that is protected by the Holy Spirit through the power of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, then of course your sect will be deficient. It doesn't mean you are any less saved, but your churches lack much of the truth that Christ gave His only Church.
We are all Christians, and you should have all the Truth instead of what your denomination has peice-mealed together. While protestantism continues to be watered down and broken, the Catholic Church continues as a shining light on hill. Our beliefs, morals and ways and manner of worship come to us from Jesus Christ and His Apostles. Your beliefs come from your interpretation. What has more value and what has more truth? The Word of God or your interpretation? It seems to me you put your interpretation over the Word of God.
chris, there you go again making anyone outside of the catholic church a 2nd class Christian and yet you claim you don't! And I have no problem with outside reading as long as we don't allow it to take precedence over the Word of God.
chris, I trust EWTN as much as I do TBN, plus 400 Anglican priests in the last 5 years sure doesn't add up to 1,000s as you stated earlier.
Hmm. Let's do a comparison for a minute.
Pastors who we revere and study their interpretations of Scripture:
Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaus, Polycarp, Origen, Eusibuius, Cyril, Athanasius Justin Martyr, Augustine, Clement, Jerome, etc.
Pastors you revere and study their interpretations:
Billy Graham, TD Jakes, Max Lucado, Bruce Ware, Dr. Dobson, Dr.James Kennedy, Pastor Hagee, Pat Robertson,Joyce Meyer, John Maxwell, etc.
While I like many, but not all, of the Protestant Pastors I've listed they are still 2000 years too late, they didn't personally know the Apostles or any of their 1st, 2nd or even 3rd generation disciples.
The best these Protestant gentlemen can do is study hard and give their best guess. By contrast, these early Christians heard the Scriptures preached by the actual people who wrote them or at a minimum their immediate successors. That kind of powerful message, entrusted to faithful people, have passed down their interpretations for centuries in an unbroker TRADITION.
Without the historic witness and without passing that witness down, you are left with guessing what the scriptures meant rather than KNOWING what they meant.
The more you read the Early Church Fathers and their interpretations of Scripture the more you will realize that the Catholic Church is where you belong if you want to live in the "Fullness" of Christ Truth.
It is time to come home to the Truth Online.
ONline,
Yes there were things like you mentioned and if you were a reasonable person who could objectively study history you would find all these "Problems" in the beginnings of the Church were crushed by the Catholic Church. The early church fathers, the vast majority, were orthodox in their beliefs.
Remember Online, it wasn't your church that we are talking about here since you have no historical connection. This is all about the Catholic Church's history. It is our history, and your church was not there.
The Catholic Church fought against the Gnostics, the Arians, the Montanists, the donatists, the Palagians, etc. We excommunicated them from the True Church. Heresies started from a lot of groups, but those that stuck closely with the successors of the Apostles NEVER FAILED, especially with the Bishop of Rome. Even when the Arians controlled 2/3rds of all the Priest at one time, the Bishop of Rome stood strong against them and Arianism died out until we see a new version of arianism call "Mormons" who follow a Gnostic book and deny the divinity of Christ.
If you do value the Apostles and those disciples in the Bible, then you should leave your church immedediately and become Catholic because these people you admire founded my church and I can't see anyplace in scripture where Jesus or any Apostle said you can start your own church outside the Apostles authority and their successors authority. Your denomination left the Original Church of Jesus Christ and you've been making it up as you go for years.
Believer,
Remember, I'm not a young guy and I've been a Protestant probably longer than you've been alive before I became Catholic. I have never met one Protestant ever who didn't buy some sort of book by some Protestant Pastor on their interpretation of Scripture.
If Protestants stopped selling "Pastor Interpretation" books and this is including devotionals too, then the only thing that would be left in these Christian book stores would be "Prosperity, health and wealth, motivational" style books.
The fact is, you deny that you do read other people's comments of the Bible and that you can learn something from someone else. In the NIV there are comments on the bottom of the page and on the side. These are all interpretations. There are thousands of books written by Pastors about every book in the bible.
So, you do care what others have to say about Scripture and you do read a lot of other insights because YOU HAVE A HUNGER FOR TRUTH. The difference is, we Catholics do the same thing, except we go to the Pastors who actually knew the Apostles and their successors. We can objectively say that their witness is far more pure and closer to the Truth of what the scriptures actually mean because of their proximity to Jesus Christ himself and His chosen followers. The Tradition of what these scriptures actually say has been kept safeguarded by the Catholic Church.
Because you lack Tradition and any historical context to the Apostles and their followers, and because your sect of Christianity was founded by a man who had no personal connection to the Apostles. You have a HUGE missing link. This is why Christians who are from the Reformation have more in common with Catholics, than Christians who's churches were founded within the last 100 years. The fact is Christianity is being watered down by the continued division of Protestantism and their lack of "HOLDING FAST TO TRADITION" that was passed by the Apostles on down through the centuries.
By going by the Bible alone, without the historic witness, your interpretation becomes "Guessing" at best.
Believer,
A wee bit conservative actually, based on the numbers from the "Coming Home" network on EWTN. In the US alone, based on information from EWTN, the vast majority of Protestants have come from the Anglican, Episcopal and Lutheran ranks. Because of these denominations' stand on topics like homosexuality, women's ordinations, etc. In the last five years over 400 Anglican Priests have come to the Catholic Church. These numbers should not surprise you. In fact, whole dioceses have become Catholic and you remember how large a diocese is right?
It is obvious from the New Testament that doctrinal confusion, legalism, sacerdotalism, and Gnostic error were beginning to find their way into the church even before the canon was closed. The writings of the Church Fathers are not free from such influences. Moreover, the next three centuries were a long chronicle of doctrinal conflict, and these men whom we call Church Fathers did not always agree with one another.
It is therefore a mistake to view the Church Fathers' writings as if they had some sort of canonical authority. These men were not apostles.
The only genuine (church fathers) are the apostles and prophets; their writings that were given by divine inspiration and recorded in the Holy Scripture. They gave us the (faith ONCE delivered to the saints)(Jude 3). The faith they delivered is able to make us (perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works) (2 Timothy 3:16-17). We don’t need anything beyond the Bible. The teaching of the (church fathers) does not contain one jot or tittle of divine revelation.
chris, "thousands" do I detect a wee bit of exaggeration here?:)
Wbmoore,
There is nothing that compares to the Word of God. You can't even compare any written document to the Holy Bible and I don't think anyone equated reading the Early Church fathers to the Bible. There are hundreds and hundreds of Protestant book stores that sell millions of books all about interpreting the Bible, and all these authors seem to act like they have a better understanding of the scriptures when in fact they never knew the men who wrote it and never met Jesus personally.
Meditating and studying the Word of God is the most important thing without question. By reading the early church fathers, who read the "ORIGINAL" scriptures and heard these scriptures preached first from the Apostles, I think even you would admit that their testimony would be far more valuable than say....for example...yours or mine. Why? Well, they actually knew the people who wrote the Bible, the early church fathers heard the actual Apostles and their Disciples preach on the Scriptures. This historic witness and testimony of how they understood this preaching is invaluable.
The reason why Protestants always get their feathers ruffles when someone mentions the "Early Church Fathers" is because their witness points directly to the Catholic Church. By Their witness, thousands of tough scripture verses are discussed and analyzed within one or two generations from Christ. Their witness and testimony to what those scriptures mean are more reliable, than someone who has no connection to the history and basically opens the bible and tries to discern what the Apostles actually meant thousands of years later. This is why Protestants who go by the Bible alone, can rarely agree.
Moreover, thousands of Protestant pastors are becoming Catholic because of the Early Church Fathers interpretations of the Scriptures and how their interpretaions unequivically are all CAtholic in terms of worship style, understanding of scripture, how scripture is to be read and understood, and the doctrines of the Church.
"To be steeped in history, is to cease to be Protestant"
Cardinal Henry Newman(Anglican convert to Catholicism)
What the church fathers taught is important, but not as important as the word of God. It is GOD's word that is inspired. Not the church fathers.
Read the church fathers, but study and meditate upon the word of God.
IHS,
I have seen people who left the RCC because they believed they could never know if they would be with Christ when they died, due to what the church teaches concerning unconfessed sins. This is little different than trying to live by the Law, or worse the hedge laws (those laws put in place by the priests to keep people from actually breaking the Law), for salvation as taught by priests of the Old Testament and Christ's time.
Acts 15:10-11
10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
As Jesus said to the Pharisees and Scribes:
Mark 7:9
And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
But later, after the people of whom I am speaking had left the RCC, they came to understand that God loves them and holds those who believe Christ came to pay the price for their sins in His hands and nothing can remove them - not even themselves.
John 10:27-29
27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.
Indeed, we were sealed by the Holy Spirit when we truly believed.
Ephesians 1:13
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
Having been sealed, we are to live righteous lives, and look forward to the day of Redemption.
Ephesians 4:30
30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Of course, the assurance of salvation is a very different thing than whether one is saved or not. But it is a big issue for many people. There are many other doctrinal problems in the RCC. No, they might state we are saved by grace through faith in Christ, but when you look at the whole of the teaching of the RCC, they have put up so many hedge laws that it makes it difficult to trust in Christ (the RCC would rather you trust in the church, which I see being as the same as trusting in Pharisees and Scribes).
I agree with believer. Please read up on the doctrine of the church you are defending.
IHS,
I have baggage from growing up. But the Catholic church is not part of it. I have nothing but pleasant memories of my time in catechism. Granted, church itself was boring, but hey, I was a kid! :)
Not, I have no bitterness for the RCC. I have no bitterness for the people of the RCC. I have only a desire that they might all go to heaven. My problem with the RCC is the bad doctrine the church hierarchy holds to. As I have said, I've known some in the RCC who were saved. But the majority worshipped saints rather than God Himself (and I realize the RCC teaches a difference between veneration and worship, but most of the laity I have met do not recognize a difference in practice).
Why would anyone want to be part of a church that tells you to pray to dead people, instead of talking to God Himself?
Isaiah 8:19
When men tell you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living?
We have ONE intercessor between us and God the Father: Christ. Why go for what would be, at best, second best?
1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
ihs, if you're going to advocate for the catholics you need to really study up on what they believe. A mortal sin must be confessed to a priest in order for it to be forgiven only venial sins can be forgiven without a priest. I'm not talking about a sinful lifestyle I'm talking about 1 sin not being confessed that can seal your eternal fate. There is a huge difference.
It is apparent that you are intentionally neglecting the real issue here; the gospel. I have repeatedly asked you if we (Protestants and Catholics) preach the same gospel but you have yet to answer. Your main focus here seems to be interpreting scripture through the eyes of Catholicism instead objectively studying the latter through God’s Word. Why?
I've never understood purgatory, only because I haven't researched it.
When a person dies in what Catholics call unrepentant Mortal Sin, then the person goes to hell. If we as Evangelicals know a person who lives an unrepentant life and continues to live in that sin up to the point when he dies and he doesn't confess his sins, then do you really believe that person is Saved?? I don't. I think anyone who doesn't confess to God their sins with remorse and a contrite heart will be damned.
Also remember, that Catholics ask forgiveness through a Priest not from a Priest. Confession to one another is in the Bible and so is the fact if a Presbyter prays for you that your sins will be forgiven. Jesus gave the power to forgive sins to the Apostles and so on. While my church doesn't do this, it seems pretty clear to me that the Bible gives evidence to the Catholic Sacrament of Confession.
Also, Catholics ask forgiveness from God through the Priest. Moreover, if they have mortal sin on their soul like sins of the flesh, and can't make it to a Priest, then they can easilly just ask God for forgiveness. My old roomate said,"God gave us the Sacraments to infuse us with Grace as tools to live a Godly life in communion with the Trinity, if one can't get to the Sacraments God is not bound by them and by Grace you will be saved if your heart is right with God and you are truly sorry for your sins and want to live in communion with Him.
I know there are a lot of ex-catholics. Maybe your Priest and your seminary fell to Liberalism. I'm sure many Catholics would be sad that they let you down. I doubt seriously you would be Protestant today if you had gone to a orthodox seminary and your Priest as a child had spoken to you about Jesus and a personal relationship as they do today.
chris, "I pray that all non-catholic Christians come home to the "Fullness" of Truth which is only available in the catholic church." "Protestants are NOT second class Christians." This is what some would call an oxymoron!
ihs, then explain to me your interpretation of purgatory as to its purpose and who goes there? Explain to me why if a catholic dies with an unconfessed mortal sin on their soul that they go to hell? Much of your view of catholicism is based on heresay and what you have read, whereas online, wb, and myself have lived it and to the best of my knowledge in three very distinct locations and parishes and dioceses and yet all of us share the same testimony. We've been where the rubber hits the pavement. Once again if it were just the three of us well maybe we could call that a coincidence, but when we hear the almost identical story from every other former catholic who has become a christian and left the catholic church that is a definite pattern. And the issue with us is not so much anger, but a godly fear of seeing people being led to believe that they are a Christian because they've been baptized into the catholic church and have partaken of the sacraments and kept many of the other requirements of the church and in truth they are lost as lost can be.
Well IHS, thanks for your help.
Yes, many ex-catholics are bitter people and always attack the Catholic Church. You see, my friend, the Catholic Church claims to be the one true Church. With that type of claim, that no other church claims, they have to attack it. Because if they left the one True Church, then while they might still be Christians, psychologically it is rough for them because of what our church claims. They also attack it because they know, especially well, that Christ found our church and not theirs and Christ entrusted His Words with His Church. Protestants love the Bible, which is a Catholic Book. I mean that pschologically has got to be tough. I know it was tough for me as a Reformed Pastor.
Also, if you left the Catholic Church then your conscience took you away. Whether it was properly formed or not, you must do what your conscience tells you is right. If you were a Catholic and honestly do not believe the Catholic Church is the true Church and you become a Protestant, then you can be saved. All Christians, because of our trinitarian baptism, are members of the body of Christ. I accept all Protestants as members of that body even those whacky fundamentalists. I honestly believe that outside the Catholic Church, Protestants are wounded because they lack Apostolic succession, valid Eucharist, Confession and their sects are not Churches founded by God, but by men.
I pray that all non-Catholic Christians come home to the "Fullness" of Truth, which is only available in the Catholic Church. For 400 years we Catholics did not consider Protestants Christians for the most part. With mutual discussions, bible study, and building friendships with them we have come to accept them as Christians, but this has only been in the last 100 years. Protestants are NOT second class Christians.
Believer,
Most of the time I feel you do a great job of being reasonable. Saying Catholics believe in a salvation by works, really diminishes your advanced degrees. Even I know that the Catholic Church excommunicated Palagius and anyone who thought that our works can earn heaven. Later, they excommunicated semi-palagianism followers too. Catholics believe salvation is by Grace through faith in Christ. You should really read St. Augustine.
Let me see here, Online, Wbmoore and Believer were all ex-Catholics. Now I get it. WOW, such baggage. I've heard that a lot of ex-Catholics who become Protestants are quite negative about Catholicism, but funny how when Protestants become Catholics they always resound with how much they loved being a Protestant and now they love being Catholic all the more.
Guys, your mutual witness is so tainted and I'm surprised you can't see it. I thank God I'm younger than you three and haven't had to endure this last 40 years of liberalism. I'm glad that I can come to the Word of God without bias against my fellow Christians. Yes, there are some Catholic beliefs that I do not accept, and there are some beliefs of fellow Evangelicals I can accept either; once saved always saved, prosperity gospel, women pastors, etc. Despite these doctrines or beliefs they are still christian. I've been a Christian all my life, and I thank God I don't have the same issues that you gentlemen do.
I've read some of the early church fathers and you know what, the early church fathers gives context to the Word of God. I love reading about what the original Christians thought about the Word of God. I see a lot of value in reading them because of their proximity to the Lord and the Apostles and their immediate successors. It is immeasurably sad you don't see this value.
I have a lot of empathy for you gentlemen. If I was Catholic and I wasn't taught to have a personal relationship with Christ when I was a child, and I had to find that relationship outside of my church, I would be angry and bitter like you and would probably attack it like you guys do.
I think I might advise some therapy for you guys.
believer,
I too have an aunt who initially told me that leaving the Catholic Church would keep me out of heaven; her sentiments were shared by the rest of my family. My grandfather was hot to say the least but when I asked him why he was Catholic, all he could say was, my parents were Catholic, I was raised Catholic and I will die Catholic. It took literally two years of debating and studying the scriptures together that finally brought about the significant change. My grandfather was able to read some material and realize the difference between what the Scriptures taught and what Rome taught; he never attended any church after that. He passed away back in 1997 and the same aunt who told me that I would be lost for leaving Catholicism is a Christian.
ihs,
It is always interesting to me when I hear of Protestant pastors joining the Catholic Church; if they had theological questions before I cant imagine how they can reconcile with so many extra biblical dogmas such as those mentioned in my earlier post.
Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables (2Timothy 4:2-4).
ihs, isn't it interesting that you note that pastors who become catholics do so after reading the works of the early catholic church fathers, I wonder what would happen if they just stayed in God's Word? Personally, to me it sounds like they weren't very well grounded in the Word of God, but then again God's Word does state that there will be those who will be tossed to and for by false teachings and doctrines.
ihs, let's face it though, any religious group such as catholics, mormons, and jws who have a works based salvation mindset will be out doing good things, but they won't be intentionally leading people to Christ by sharing God's plan of salvation with others. Ephesians 2:8-10, declares that we are not saved by works but we are saved to join God in doing His work which is the fulfillment of His Great Commission.
online, I had an aunt who told me right after I got saved she felt sorry for me for doing that because now I would be cast into hell for leaving the catholic church, then several years later after she got a divorce she began asking my wife and I to pray for her and her family when they were going through some difficult times when prior to that she wouldn't give us the time of day when it came to spiritual matters. Plus, I still have an aunt who sends us Christmas cards saying that a number of novenna masses are being said for us. And the sad thing is I know she has to pay money to have all those masses said.
ihs, once again a number of catholics who have become Christians and especially those who are priests and nuns I believe choose to stay in the catholic church not out of loyalty to the catholic church as much as to be used of God in reaching other catholics for Christ. They see their position as making them more effective in reaching them and also giving them credibility as well. Plus, a lot of priests and nuns have left the church over the issue of celibacy which is another extra-biblical teaching of the catholic church. But I would be interested to see how many catholics made professions of faith in Christ as a result of someone outside the catholic church witnessing to them or as a result of attending an evangelistic event outside the catholic church and how many came to Christ as a direct result of the teaching they received in a parochial school, CDC, or through a message preached at a mass.
Believer,
Lol, amen; the Calvinism/Arminianism discussion will have to be on another article. Recently a cousin and I attended the West Coast Conference in Scottsdale, Arizona where R.C. Sproul, John McArthur, and Ligon Duncan spoke on this and other topics; the bookstore, fellowship, and time off was indeed refreshing.
http://www.ligonier.org/blog/2008/09/ligonier-west-coast-conference-9.html
Now back to our original topic; it seems that most ex - Catholic experiences are pretty much identical. My entire family was raised Catholic and it was not until 1990 that I became a Christian. I cannot begin to tell you about the commotion that followed but fast forward to this day, three quarters of them are no longer Catholic. The Lord has allowed his truth to shine not only in my heart but in the hearts of most of my family members. God is truly good. There are still some family members that adhere to the Catholic faith and yes, we all get along just fine. As a matter of fact I attended my cousins graduation at Norte Dame a few years ago and we had a great time. This same cousin and I continue to have deep theological discussions, even when at a football game; pray that the Lord illuminates his heart.
Today in this postmodern world the gospel is being diluted by the culture, being diluted by the ecumenical movement, and by liberal theology. As a result many people are being given a counterfeit gospel which cannot save. As Christians it is our duty to not only proclaim the true gospel but also to defend it; we must continue to correctly define it, lovingly share it, and oppose anything that attempts to alter it.
May the Lord continue to bless and keep you believer.
No, if we met Mormons on missions we already know they are nice but they are polytheists who deny the trinity. They are not Christians. Moreover, Mormons only seek to convert people, not help them. True mission work is preaching the Word and Helping people because you generally want to help them. Ever see a Mormon hospital or halfway house or a Jehovah Hospital??? No, but you will see more Catholic Hospitals than any religious group.
The Catholics we met on Mission also let us use their Church for our services. When you actually go on mission in dangerous territories, then you know who are the Christians since we all have to fight as one. Catholics will fight right next to a Baptist, next to a Lutheran, next to a Methodist. There are no Mormons or other cults in the Vineyard, risking life to spread the Good news.
As far as I can judge, and many of my teachers too Catholics hold to the same basics that makes us all Christians. I've listed those points that we share before, so I won't list them again.
Believer,
If you know Bruce Ware from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, then you might have known my dad since they are friends.
ETS is the Evangelical Theological Society. Also, as far as the Exodus of Protestants to becoming Catholic I have a few thoughts on that subject.
I'm sure there are more numbers of Catholics becoming Protestant, since objectively speaking they have more people than all our denominations combined. So, mathematically it makes sense. I did some minor research and found that there are many Protestants that have become Catholics, but what stands out the most is that many of these are former Protestant Pastors who were extremely well thought of and had amazing reputations. In fact, the former President of the ETS converted to Catholicism. That was a huge deal! If you find a Catholic Priest who converted to Protestantism it is a rare thing, but finding a Protestant Pastor who became Catholic especially after reading the Church fathers AND STUDYING DOCTRINE became Catholic because of the Truth of that Church is not rare and in fact there are thousands of them in the US alone.
Believer,
My dad thinks the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is a joke. He said they are a bunch of Liberal namby pambies, who want to water down the Bible and what it says. We met a lot of them on missions and my dad and grand daddy called them "Koombayahs". They would rather have everyone get along than truly seek the Truth.
This is what my dad said.
IHS,
Why do Catholics bring up the "exodus" of protestants for "greener patures" in the Catholic faith? I can find statistics that show that more Catholics leave the Catholic faith in favor of Protestantism. So we can leave that argument out of the equation. People are flopping back and forth. As believer said "...most studies show it has little to do with the doctrines or theology of the catholic church..."
online, although we would probably disagree on the eternal security issue, your catholic teaching is identical to what I was taught by the catholic grade school, seminary, and church I attended until I became a Christian in 1971.
ihs, let me take a stab in the dark, if the church your father attends is a Southern Baptist Church, has it by chance aligned itself with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship?
ihs, as far as those who leave protestant denominations and become catholics, most studies show it has little to do with the doctrines or theology of the catholic church, but the liturgical practices such as the mass of the catholic church.
ihs, and the ETS is? Plus the first thing Fulton J. Sheen did was change St. Andrews Seminary to Kings Preparatory School to prepare catholic boys and girls to consider full-time religious vocations. For that day he was seen as a radical and as I said he didn't stay our bishop for very long. This was 1967-68 when this occured. You notice he didn't ever make cardinal!
ihs, if your parents would have worked with mormons they would have seen the same thing, so based on that would they believe that the mormon church is a truly Christian church?
ihs, it's not about reforming the catholic, methodist, or even baptist churches, it's all about fulfilling God's Great Commission. Bringing people to the saving grace of God by teaching them the facts that they're a sinner and as a result are separated from God and because God loved them so much He sent His Son, Jesus Christ to pay a price that only He as the perfect Son of God could pay when He shed His blood on the Cross of Calvary which God affirmed was complete when He raised Him from the dead on the third day. That God desires them to not only be sorry for their sins, but to turn from their sins and turn to Him by putting their complete faith and trust in the person and finished work of His Son, Jesus Christ alone. That as a result they become a child of God, are forgiven for their sins, are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, have a home in heaven with God for all of eternity, and are called to join God in fulfilling the Great Commission by being light and salt to a lost world and growing in Christ-likeness through being discipled and by daily surrendering to the Lordship of Christ and the control of the Holy Spirit and by becoming a member of a local Bible-believing, teaching, living Great Commission church.
ihs,
I apologize for being sardonic but you yourself were a tidbit agitated when you stated (take your bias glasses off, and just read it plainly. Maybe the wording is a bit complex). At any rate, let us try to stay on task and objectively address the issues here.
The collected works that you mentioned also sit in my library and I too have studied them objectively; I should also tell you that I was a Catholic for more than twenty years. I can honestly tell you that the church does teach a works oriented salvation; most Catholics sincerely pray that their good works will outweigh their bad deeds in order to enter the kingdom. Assurance is something that is wanting in their midst, we were taught never to say I am saved because one never knew if their good works were enough. I am not talking about the false teaching of once saved always saved; my point is, Christ was never portrayed as the all sufficient substitute; the blood of Christ was never enough, we needed to more.
(What doctrines of the Catholics are contrary to the Word of God? I'm interested.)
Here are a few:
Indulgences, purgatory, transubstantiation, immaculate conception, papal supremacy, papal infallibility, perpetual virginity of Mary, Mary as co-mediatrix/co-redemptrix, tradition equal to scripture, works oriented salvation, priestly confessions, repetitive prayers through the rosary, prayer for the dead, removing the 2nd commandment the Decalogue, the assumption of Mary, etc.
It is extremely difficult to defend your opponents views especially when their views are not found anywhere in Scripture.
The Reformers were not given the option to stay and reform the church from within; they were earthier excommunicated or dealt with. Historic Protestantism recovered biblical truths that were buried under a mountain of extra biblical traditions that neither Jesus nor the apostles taught. In short we do not preach, teach, and proclaim the same gospel; they are polar opposites.
IHS,
Your right and wrong. The Catholic church wasn't reformed...because people left it. But they left for a church that taught the truth. And it seems to me that many of those who did stay behind to try and reform the Catholic church was excommunicated anyway.
Also, when I grew up my family was very anti-catholic. I think that changed over time when we started doing Missions accross the world and always had to work with Catholics in various cities. To see their piety and devoutness to God is beautiful and their dedication to the poor and under served reveals their heart for Christ.
My dad is no longer anti-catholic and neither is my grandfather. They got to see Catholics in action and got to see their love for Christ manifested by their love of their neighbor.
I love missions and maybe that is where I'll go.
Also, just so you know. One of our senior pastors from my dad's church left to become a Catholic Deacon. He was the most talented preacher I ever saw and now he is a Catholic Deacon preaching at Mass.
He was a Baptist minister for 20 years, I think, and his whole family coverted to Catholicism with a few members from my dad's Church. He told me before I went into Seminary, that he became Catholic because simply it was the Church founded by Christ and the only Church to have His personal promise to lead it into all Truth and gave the Keys to Peter alone. He studied a lot of the Church Fathers while getting his Masters.
My Church was founded by my dad, not Jesus. My dad is great and all, but he is no Jesus. I can see why it was compelling for him. I continue to pray for wisdom and read the Word so God will use me in His vineyard.
I know exactly who Bishop Fulton Sheen is and he was wonderful. In fact, people have put his name in for the Sainthood process. This summer I saw some of his old black and white evangelism programs on TV. Now, he was amazing. I agree, he acted and sounded "born again" didn't he!!! I thought he might have been a Pentecostal before he was Catholic.
Remember what I said, the last 40 years Liberalism has infected this Church and now they are dying out especially with Pope Benedict as their Captain. He is one of the most knowledgeble Bible Scholars and has a lot of respect from the ETS. He knows the Word, and most of it by heart and in many languages to boot.
I'm glad you've met "Some" Catholics who are born again and saved. I think it is more than just "some", but we all have our experiences and opinions. I think your generation is lucky to have any faith in Jesus with how much Liberalism and relativism that has run amok. I'm thankful to be seeing Liberalism in the Church decay.
Think about this for a moment. All The Reformers failed to Reform the Church. Why? Because they left it. The Catholic Church was the only real game in historic Christianity. The only way to make change, is best done from within. The only way I can make Change in my church is to make change from within. I can't change the Methodist Church down the street because I'm not Methodist.
I know that the ego's of the Reformers were very high if you read their letters. I personally wish they would have worked from within, than depart and start something new. I feel they truly threw out a lot of good Apostolic teaching, that we as Protestants are only re-discovering today like the Liturgy.
prophet, you're absolutely on-target about those doctrines only scratching the surface as well as your post on those who were saved and stayed in the catholic church. Every true believer who stayed told me that they believed God was leading them to share His Plan of Salvation with other catholics.
I too have met a few born again Christians in the Catholic church. Some of them, they told me, were there to share the truth with those around them. They were somewhat successful. I know of two that got excommunicated from the church for "prosletyzing" (sp?).
ihs, I don't deny that there are true believers in the catholic church, in fact I personally know some. And I have no doubt there are some priests and nuns who are truly born again and in fact I've met some. And I'm sure they are sharing the Truth of God's Plan of Salvation with others even to the point of preaching sermons to that effect. When I was in St. Andrews Seminary in Rochester NY, Bishop Fulton J. Sheen became our bishop, but he lasted only about a year and was sent to another position. Years later I heard that he was moved because he had had a born-again experience and was seen as a threat by some in the catholic hiearchy. Please understand I am not sure how valid that story is since I never read anything official about it and even if it was valid I'm not sure there would be any official report about it. I say that to say this I don't doubt that what your telling me about your experience is true and I've seen some of those things myself, but I'm still not convinced that the heiarchy of the catholic church holds those same views.
believer,
And that wasn't even a complete list of non-biblical teachings that the Catholics promote.
ihs, I don't have to defend them I was raised under them for 19 years and initially as a Christian questioned why others didn't believe them. After much research I came to realize that they were extra-biblical teachings as opposed to biblical teachings.
ihs, so it's a Bapticostal Church, I have several churches in my association who see themselves in that way.
Believer,
You are never butting in, by the way. Your heart is always true to Christ and His Word. You could never butt in.
Are all those you listed doctrines? I honestly don't know if they are. If they are, have you ever tried to defend those beliefs from their side of the fence? I found when I was first in college thinking about getting a JD and going to Law school, that it was always important to try and defend the other side the best you could and then this way you could build a stronger case against it.
I've got a paper due, so I don't have time for all of these doctrines. Would you take on one of them and try and defend it? Could you be that objective?
Calvary Baptist is a Church where both Baptist and Pentecostals(who were not into tongues all that much) merged to form this church. Basically, it was a church of believers who were extremely charismatic.
Believer,
Thank you for your response. You wrote, "We need to quit muddying the waters with all this doctrinal, theological, religious ranting and join God in sharing a crystal clear message of salvation to the lost." I would agree with the last part, but I would also disagree with the first part my friend. How can we honestly share Christianity with the lost when there are too many versions of it. Which denomination is right? If we Christians could have one set of doctrines like it was in the beginning, it would be far easier to spread the Word. It is because of doctrines that we have 40,000 or more distinct and very different denominations. As the son of a Southern Baptist, I see much division even within the SBC. It is important to think about doctrines since Paul called us to be of one mind, one Lord and one Baptism. I think we should honor that since Paul was inpired by the Holy Spirit when he said these words.
I'm guessing that you and Wbmoore are in your late 40's and early 50's. I could be wrong, but I'm in my 20's. The young Catholics I meet are fired up about the Lord and they get it. They know about having a personal relationship with Christ. I've found in my limited experience that there are a lot of ex-Catholics who have thankfully become Evangelicals. At least they are still Christian. I've heard from many Priests, both Orthodox and Catholic alike, that the last 40 years has been the toughest to teach the saving Grace of Christ because of the disease of Liberalism that has INFECTED all the Churches, Catholic and Protestant alike.
I'm afraid, because of your age, you and Wbmoore were caught in this "Period" of Liberalism and now the tide is changing back. Kids are taught about Jesus in their Catholic Schools and they love their Church. One of my roomates this summer was Catholic and he was becoming a Priest. He was so onfire for the Lord, he also regularly spoke in tongues. I've never been a big fan of speaking in tongues, but if you TRULY have the gift then use it. I would hear him when he prayed in private speak in tongues sometimes. He is going to be an amazing Priest.
I honestly believe it is the time period you lived in which is the problem. Liberalism infected many churches. Protestants, as you know, change denominations quite frequently but it is never reported. If a Catholic leaves the Church it is a big deal. I'm just thankful now that Liberalism is going to decay and die into the abyss soon and us young passionate objective Christians will with the Grace of God promote Truth. Liberalism or better called Relativism within the Church must be gone.
ihs, I hope I'm not butting in, but here goes, indulgences and there purpose, mortal and venial sins, purgatory and limbo, the sinlessness and perpetual virginity of Mary, and those are just a few teachings that we find no biblical support for. Plus, what's a Calvary Baptist?
Prophet,
Since my family's Christian tradition has been both SBC, Calvary Baptist and now non-denominational, I am rarely in a position defending Catholic Doctrine.
I have no bias against Catholics or any Christians who love and live for Christ and accept Him as their savior. All denominations have something wrong with them where they interpret things wrong because of their own biases.
Maybe this could be a great education for everyone. What doctrines of the Catholics are contrary to the Word of God? I'm interested.
ihs, first of all thank you for your response to the boasting issue. But you do bring excess baggage to the table in that you know the Truth. Once again unless there has been a dramatic change in the catholic church, catholics are not told the Truth when it comes to God's Plan of Salvation. If I were the only former catholic who felt he was not exposed to the Truth that would be one thing, but every former catholic that I've met says the same thing. It's not that the catholic church didn't teach us good things, but they never told us we could and how we can have a personal relationship with God through the person and finished work of His Son, Jesus Christ ALONE. Now if you or anyone else can show me where that teaching is now mandatory in the catholic church, I doubt very much that many catholics are hearing the Truth today. And with all due respect all this talk about grace and merit is a bunch of nonsense, because Christ says we must have the faith of a child if we are to enter into the kingdom of heaven and to me all this discussion about grace and merit sounds like the adults talking in a Charlie Brown special to children who need to hear the Truth most. Neither doctrine, theology, or religion will get a person into heaven, but only a person turning from their sins and turning to God through the person and finished work of His Son, Jesus Christ will do that and more importantly than getting into heaven it allows us to have a personal, intimate, growing relationship with God which is why He created us in the first place. We need to quit muddying the waters with all this doctrinal, theological, religious ranting and join God in sharing a crystal clear message of salvation to the lost. Any denomination that makes it difficult or unclear of what a person needs to do to become a child of God needs to repent of that and begin preaching God's simple Plan of Salvation. And specifically, when I hear the catholic church as a whole is doing just that, then is when I will begin to believe they truly are preaching, teaching, and sharing the Truth, God's Truth with regards to salvation.
How can someone follow the false teachings of the Catholic church, and then claim to follow the Word of God, when the teachings of the RCC often contradict the Word of God?
The below link is the best summation of Merit, I've seen. If you think I haven't done a decent job explaining it, then maybe it is because I am not Catholic and I am trying my best to explain something objectively without bias.
Also, I love the Word of God and although you were being a bit sardonic concerning my reading of other materials like the Catechism or the Early Church Fathers, I will always use the Word of God as my foundation and anything that contradicts the Word will have no place in my beliefs.
I will also tell you though, that because I bring no baggage to the table when I study and read the Word, then I think I have a more objective basis to read and interpret. Many of you have a lot of baggage when it comes to the Catholics and Orthodox. That is sad. Without that baggage maybe you could see the Truth about our Fellow Christians and not act so belligerant against them.
Online,
Over my years of study I've collected more than just the Catechism, Westminster, Luther's, Calvin and many other Faith manuals. I study them all objectively.
Here is a great website on merit, that should at least make you understand the Catholic position on merit from both Scripture and Tradition. I hope you will bother to read it, if you truly seek truth.
http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=7909
Here is something from "The Raccolta Or Collection Of Indulgenced Prayer With Good Works" by Ambrose St. John:
323. Veneration of St Peter's Statue.
i. 50 Days, to any one who shall, with contrite heart and devotion, kiss the foot of the bronze statue of this Apostle in St Peter's at Rome. IV. T.Q.
ii. 50 Days, once a day, for kissing the foot of a copy of the said statue, blessed by the Sovereign Pontiff; available for all the members of the family dwelling in the house where the statue is kept. IV.
(See Instructions, p. i.)
323. Pius IX, Br. May 15,1857; February 4, 1877; Leo XIII, Bfs. April 27, 1880.
When we read such things as that, we realize how important it is to be thoroughly grounded in the word of God. Would the Lord direct us to do such things? No. So "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Col 2:8).
ihs,
You did not answer my other question; how could anyones good works merit grace FOR others?
Do I misinterpret merit? Lets reexamine your earlier definition for merit:
Spiritual worthiness.
The first three definitions for merit do not apply in the context of this discussion, so this brings us to the fourth definition for merit; Spiritual worthiness achieved by doing good works.
Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes (reckons, credits to one’s account) righteousness apart from works (Romans 4:4-6).
The Bible asserts that he who (does not work) but (believes) is justified before God. Justification is not the reward for our works. Justification is the free gift of grace which we do NOT merit. The works that a Christian performs - and every true believer performs good works - are not the basis of their acceptance before God. The blood and righteousness of Jesus is the ONLY basis for the believer's justification.
Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him... by the obedience of one shall many will be made righteous (Romans 5:9, 19).
That is the true Gospel; Romes message is a counterfeit. Perhaps, it would be best if you put down the Catechism, return to the Scriptures and read them plainly.
IHS,
I must be misunderstanding what you are saying, because it appears to be contradictory.
"religion spiritual credit: spiritual worthiness achieved by doing good works."
This says that you do something good and achieve spiritual worthiness.
That is getting spiritual worthiness through something you do.
Notice the definition for achieve (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/achieve):
- verb (used with object)
1. to bring to a successful end; carry through; accomplish: The police crackdown on speeders achieved its purpose.
2. to get or attain by effort; gain; obtain: to achieve victory.
- verb (used without object)
3. to bring about an intended result; accomplish some purpose or effect.
The dictionary definition for merit even includes the Roman Catholic definition (see #5 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/merit):
1. claim to respect and praise; excellence; worth.
2. something that deserves or justifies a reward or commendation; a commendable quality, act, etc.: The book's only merit is its sincerity.
3. merits, the inherent rights and wrongs of a matter, as a lawsuit, unobscured by procedural details, technicalities, personal feelings, etc.: The case will be decided on its merits alone.
4. Often, merits. the state or fact of deserving; desert: to treat people according to their merits.
5. Roman Catholic Church. worthiness of spiritual reward, acquired by righteous acts made under the influence of grace.
6. Obsolete. something that is deserved, whether good or bad.
- verb (used with object)
7. to be worthy of; deserve.
- verb (used without object)
8. Chiefly Theology. to acquire merit.
- adjective
9. based on merit: a merit raise of $25 a week.
Thank you believer. I just had to say something because I felt your boastfulness was unlike you since I've come to appreciate your cool headed ego and thoughtfulness. If I did boast, it was boasting about others and not myself. I do boast in my learning of Christ and getting to know Him better everyday.
With regards to MERIT, Online, 2007 in the Catechism states, " With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everthing from him, our Creator." And in 2008 it goes on to say that "Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit."
You miss interpret merit. Read the whole area on Merit, take your bias glasses off, and just read it plainly. Maybe the wording is a bit complex. We do merit Heaven by Cooperating with God's grace or you can say we deserve Heaven by cooperation with God's grace. It is not earning Heaven. For all good works come from God, so our cooperation in His divine Grace merits us Heaven. God chose us first, not the other way around. The Charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God.
Our merit is God's Grace exposed by man's love of God. The Merits of our good works are gifts of the divine goodness as stated in the Catechism. I get it, why don't you?
Here is the definition of Merit: Spiritual worthiness.
mer·it [ mérrit ]
noun (plural mer·its)
Definition:
1. value: value that deserves respect and acknowledgment
a work of considerable technical and artistic merit
2. good quality: a good or praiseworthy characteristic that somebody or something has ( often used in the plural )
3. ability: proven ability or accomplishment
She got her promotion based on merit.
4. religion spiritual credit: spiritual worthiness achieved by doing good works.
Merit does not mean to earn.
ihs, please don't misunderstand me I'm not saying there aren't times when I do boast and could and normally do get a good dose of humility. But as I've told some and maybe you before when it comes to some issues I tend to get very intense and passionate which might be seen as boasting or anger by some. And I would encourage you to confront me when you see that and allow me to tell you which it is, thanks.
ihs, by sharing what God has done in and through me is that what you call boasting? Because what God has done in and through me, He will and does do through any and all believers who are surrendered to the Lordship of His Son, Jesus Christ and the control of His Holy Spirit. Plus, your sharing about your surrounding yourself with the finest Christian minds and getting a cemetery degree appear to fall into the category of boasting. And you might want to share your concern in this area with chris and tallguy who seem to make it a habit of letting those of us who are not catholics know that we may be Christians but in comparison to catholics we are no more than second class Christians at best. Plus, I noticed that when you find yourself in a corner you tend to play the boasting vs. humility card, just my perception mind you.
ihs, you are correct there was a time in my life when I hated the catholic church for never telling me the truth about how I could have a personal relationship with Him through His Son, Jesus Christ, but less than a year after I got saved that went away when I was at a Leighton Ford Crusade in my hometown of Rochester NY and I walked into the War Memorial and saw hundreds if not thousands of Christians who lived in the Rochester area and I realized not only was the catholic church wrong for never sharing the Bible and specifically God's Plan of Salvation but so were Christians is the Rochester area for not sharing it with me either. Since then I have come to realize I can either be a part of the problem or join God in being a part of the solution in reaching our lost friends and world with the Gospel of Christ and share with as many as possible God's true and only Plan of Salvation.
ihs,
I too read the area in 2010 page 487; it speaks of God initiating grace and how no one can merit the INITIAL grace given. Gods initial grace is not what has been discussed here; it is the belief that we can merit salvation by our works. Not only does the Catechism speak of meritorious works which gains salvation for us but for others as well. How could anyones good works merit grace FOR others?
I appreciate all the scriptural references that you gave highlighting works motivated by love but again, this is not my point. I agree that good works is the fruit of our faith but the scriptures do not teach that our good works merit salvation; it is a gift. How does one earn a gift?
Intereting, IHS,
I do not read bitterness when I read believer's posts. I read gratitude for what God did, and perhaps sadness that the RCC does not as universally teach what it should teach and holds to doctrines contrary to the Old and New Testament.
Believer,
I do not boast in my own salvation, but I boast only in Christ who is my Lord and His work on the Cross for me. Catholics and evangelicals I know do not boast about salvation. We are not the judges, this is for God alone. To boast in something that we are not the judge of is unwise. It is better to be humble and only Boast in the promises of Christ.
Your ego could get the better of you Believer, so a little humility would be nice. Also, your bitterness is revealed that you hate the fact you had to leave the Catholic Church to find Christ, when others have received Christ in the same Church you once called home.
Your negativism is a tool of the devil. So, please seek the Lord in all humility and boast not in your salvation but instead of the saving Grace of Christ since we deserve nothing. Boast in the Gospel, Boast about the saving Grace of Christ, but please don't boast in your own personal salvation. It is a bit haughty, even for you.
thanks believer.
The same to you, brother.
vsedriver, ignore "and I didn't", should be "and if I didn't", thanks.
vsedriver, I too was taught to believe in Christ as a catholic and I didn't I couldn't go to heaven, but I was also taught if I died with unconfessed mortal sin on my soul I would go to hell. I was also taught about a place called purgatory that I would go to if I was not good enough to immediately go to heaven and there I would spend much time working off all my sins and either after I did enough or enough prayers and masses were offered on my behalf or a combination of both I would finally be allowed into heaven.
vsedriver, were you ever taught you had to acknowledge the fact that you were a sinner and needed to repent of your sin by turning to God through the person and finished work of Christ alone/
must be getting late in the day... that should have been Catholicism
Believer... the door goes both ways. I know of some evangelical Christians who have converted to Christianity. One was a minister for most of his life. He brought some of his congregation with him.
vsedriver, what exactly were you taught with regards to salvation comes by grace through faith in Christ alone and who and where were you taught this,
Christ died for our sins and opened heaven for us. Who ever believes in him shall have eternal life. I learned this in a Catholic grade school.
ihs, I should have added that several of the catholics I know who came to Christ through the Charismatic Movement stayed in the catholic church in hope of sharing the truth of God's salvation with other catholics.
wb, you did well in presenting the Readers Digest Condensed Large Print Edition of the basic flaws in roman catholicism, great job my brother and continue to be blessed as you continue serving Him.
IHS,
sorry I did not get into all the scriptures concerning obedience, I simply subsumed them under Romans 1:5 "Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith." There were plenty more on the subject. Believe it or not, I was trying to make a lot of points without spending books of space. :)
The RCC is as diverse as the protestant world. Its my experience (and that of many, tho not all, catholics and former catholics I have spoken to) that they have little or no understanding of the doctrines of the church. There is a believe people may be prayed out of pergatory into heaven. There is a belief that paying money or praying or doing good deeds on behalf of someone else can move someone from purgatory to heaven, but this goes against Eph 2:8-9. Christ is He who takes away the sins of the world, not anyone else's efforts (Hebrews 9:28). The idea that anyone can affect your final destination in any way other than teaching about faith in Christ is against what God said in the Bible, as each of us are solely responsible for our words and deeds and will answer for them (Deuteronomy 24:16; Ezekiel 18:20; 2 Cor 5:6-10). It is only redemption through the righteousness of Christ that justifies us (Romans 3:21-25).
And it was not any humility that made people answer that they did not know if they would go to heaven (nothing was said about salvation). They simply could not answer in the affirmative. The best any of them could answer for was 'I dont know' or 'maybe'. When asked why, it was because they thought they would either go to hell or at best to purgatory because they did not know if they would die in a state of grace. None of them believed they would go to heaven. Purgatory is a doctrine only supported in the apocrypha that goes against what the Old and New Testament teaches. (2 Cor 5:6-7; Philippians 1:21-24).
Romans 2:2-8 speaks of being holy, not good works. And this is made more clear by Eph 2:8-9. But you are correct, that Eph 2:8-10 tell us we have been saved through faith to do good works. But those good works do not save us.
Also, James used the term faith the way Paul used belief. Both James and Paul taught that salvation is through faith in Christ's redeeming work, but that faith must be exemplified in the believer's life (Acts 26:20).
ihs, the moment I became a Christian God's Holy Spirit sealed my name in the Lamb's Book of Life and Jesus tells me that I am in the palm of the Father's hand and nothing or no one to include myself can remove me from His hand. Plus, in the Book of Hebrews it says that if it were possible for someone to lose their salvation there is no possible way to be saved again.
ihs, so how do you know at the end of the day you're still saved or not, plus it sure sounds like if you haven't already you're on the verge of buying into a works salvation mind-set?
ihs, that's because most catholics speak a foreign language when it comes to the truth of salvation through Christ alone. Plus, I personally know catholics who came to Christ as a result of the Charismatic Movement of the late 60s and early 70s and not a one of them has a problem sharing their salvation experience. The reason most catholics don't "boast" about their salvation is because they have nothing to "boast" about since many if not most have ever heard God's plan of salvation.
vsedriver, what exactly were you taught with regards to salvation comes by grace through faith in Christ alone and who and where were you taught this, because every former catholic I know who is now a Christian have one thing in common we never once heard God's Plan of Salvation shared with us from someone within the hiearchy of the catholic church, trust me this is not just a coincidence but it is a pattern.
Believer said, "Because trust me had that been taught by the catholic church I for one would have heard it because since I was little I always had a hunger for the things of God and in fact when our monsignor came in to our class I'd ask him a ton of questions about God and not once did he or any other priest or church leader say anything about being saved by grace through faith."
Just because you did not receive a proper Catholic Education does not mean the Catholic Church doesn't teach that we are saved by Grace through Faith. As a Catholic this is what I have been taught and what I have taught my children. Catholic education doesn't end once you leave school. But it is up to each Catholic to continue their education to fully understand the dogma of their religion.
I can't remember who asked this, but it was concerning how Catholics may not even know they are saved if you ask them. I think it is very important when you try to speak another language, that you first learn the culture. Catholics by and large are extremely private about their faith and would never "Boast" about their salvation. They are rather humble when it comes to salvation in general.
On the contrary, I've met way too many fellow evangelicals that boast too much about their salvation. They will say in a crowd, "Yes, ofcourse I'm saved". I always feel that the person who talks the loudest usually is very weak in inside themselves. I do not believe like some of you that "once saved always saved". I believe that we can I either choose to reject or accept Christ. It is our free will that God gave us, that we should choose Him CONSTANTLY every day and perservere in love to the end. God wants our love most of all, and we show that love by doing good, having faith and loving Him like no one else and loving others as ourselves.
Remember, when talking with Catholics about Grace, Sanctification, Faith and Works, it is very important to understand them culturally before you try to translate their Catholic language.
Online,
With all due respect to you, I think if you are going to represent something from the Catechism, then you should represent it fully. You wrote only half of the area in 2010 page 487, which could easilly lead someone to the wrong conclusion.
The most important part of that is the preface"Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion." This huge part points out that we only cooperate with God's grace and through charity we will attain salvation. We must cooperate with God's Grace, and that is by responding to God's call.
During my Summer internship with five different Pastors I studied a lot on Grace and how we cooperate with it. While I agree with all the passages of scriptures you wrote, you can't negate other passages. You must take the whole bible at its WORD, and not just take peices out and try to form doctrine.
Here are some scriptures that attest to us having to respond to God's grace.
Gal 5:6 "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." NIV This scripture alone attests to the Catholic view of faith.
1Cor 13:2 "Faith without love is nothing"
Jn 14:15 "If you LOVE me, keep my commandments"
Mt 19:16-17 " 16Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"
17"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."
Here are some other topics that are also affirmed in the Bible:
Good works: Romans 2:2-8-Eternal life by perserverance in Good Works.
Eph: 2:8-10 We are created in Christ Jesus for Good works.
James: 2:14-24 a man is justified by works and not faith alone.
I affirm all the scriptures that Wbmoore, believer and you Online put down. The problem comes when you read the Bible as a whole. If you find something that is contradictory, then you must try to understand the context of the whole of the bible.
Yes, by Believing in Jesus we will be saved. I believe that. I also believe that "Belief" is more than just saying you believe. It is an action. Love is not a feeling it is an "Active Choice" of the will.
Love, faith and belief all require a choice that requires action on that decision. Without an active love, faith or belief then your faith is superficial. I think we do cooperate with God's Grace and we can take part in our own sanctification and through His Grace we will enter into enternal Life.
IHS,
" we are saved by Grace through faith"
I agree with this statement. And that IS what they say. But as I have said, they use the term differently than anyone else. They are saved through belief in what the church says for them to believe in. No catholic I have met will ever tell me they know they are going to heaven. Perhaps because they know that its an iffy thing with them. They never know if they are in a 'state of grace' or not. But Christ said it simply:
John 5:24
I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.
John 11:25-26
25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26 and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
I agree with what you say, if we have been saved (due to belief in Christ), we will be changed. We should show that change in our lives. If we do not show that change, we are not changed.
Paul wrote we are called ot obedience through faith.
Romans 1:5
5 Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.
But If we are saved, we have been sealed with the Holy Spirit.
Ephesians 4:30
And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
We need no man to intercede with God for us, as we have CHRIST as our intercessor.
1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
WE know that if we are saved, we go to be with God upon death.
2 Corinthians 5:6-9
6 Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. 7 We live by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it.
I've spoken to more than a few catholics and most in the RCC do not teach these doctrines.
As I mentioned earlier, I would have to take issue with the assumption that they (the Catholic hierarchy) truly holds to salvation by grace through faith in the biblical sense. There needs to be a clear definition of terms; the ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together) document uses words like grace, faith, and salvation without honestly highlighting the fact that both communions have a totally different understanding of what these mean.
The Gospel:
The Gospel is Jesus Christ and what he has done, period. It is through faith in Christ and his works alone that man is justified.
I am sure that you have enjoyed meeting and interacting with many Catholics in a spirit of ecumenism but do not allow the passion for unity to overshadow the truths of scripture and the gospel of Christ.
For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ (Galatians 1:10).
ihs,
Thanks for responding back. The Catholic view on salvation and the gospel really is not the same as you may believe. First, salvation: they repeatedly claim that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
(Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it) [Catholic Catechism page 224, section 846.]
Next, they do teach that men can merit salvation by their works.
(Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the grace needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life.) [Catholic Catechism page 487, section 2010.]
The Scriptures simply do not teach that, for example, Ephesians 2:8, 9 reads: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; (Titus 3:5).
(What does that mean, working in Love?)
Working in love is the grateful heart demonstrating its faith, nevertheless, the works of love do not merit or contribute to ones salvation; otherwise salvation would not be referred to as a gift.
Jesus said, (So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do) [Luke 17:10].
wilderness, well said my friend, be blessed as you continue to serve Him, believer
Let us always remember that accepting, tolerating, or overlooking false and very dangerous beliefs is far from the "common good of the body of Christ." We need more individuals who are willing to expose false doctrine and the wiles of the Satan, even at the expense of being called troublemakers, judgmental, etc. If there is poison in the pot, people need to be warned.
ihs, the correct question to ask a catholic is what happens to a catholic who dies with an unconfessed mortal sin on their soul? As for works the Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons do good works yet their theology is totally off. Plus I had a friend who was being heavily recruited by the mormons and some told him that people are saved by grace through faith but if you study their theology you will see it is clearly a works salvation theology. So just because a person or group advocates good works does not mean they are a Christian or Christian group. But the greatest good work a person can do is to tell a lost person how they can be saved and not only do few catholics do this most don't know that answer to the question themselves. I'd suggest rather than asking chris and tallguy you ask that question to former catholics who are now saved and part of a true evangelical church. Plus are you saying that people like wb and myself are liars or that we were absent from school or mass the day they said how a person can be saved? Because trust me had that been taught by the catholic church I for one would have heard it because since I was little I always had a hunger for the things of God and in fact when our monsignor came in to our class I'd ask him a ton of questions about God and not once did he or any other priest or church leader say anything about being saved by grace through faith.
Simply speaking, you can't have true faith without good works that show love of God and neighbor and for yourself.
Good works always follow a faithful servant and child of God. We are not perfect, but we strive to be like Christ. Any good works we do ARE solely by HIS GRACE. We cannot do anything good by ourselves without God's grace.
Online,
My appologies for not responding to you. I was busy responding to Believer and Wbmoore.
You ask about the Gospel and about Salvation. From what I know, after going to many retreats with ecumenical speakers and having read the Catechism from cover to cover, the Catholic Church's view of Salvation is similar to mine.
The Catholic view of Salvation, AND PLEASE MSNCHRIS or Tallguy tell me if I am not correct, is that we are saved by Grace through faith. This has always been the standard belief. Most recently they signed a joint declaration which spelled it out further with Lutherans that we are saved by Grace through faith working in love. What does that mean, working in Love?
We Evangelicals would say we are saved by Grace, through faith alone. Well, let us define faith. Faith isn't simply saying you believe in Christ. The devil believes in Christ and who He is. Faith is ACCEPTING CHRIST as your personal Lord and Savior. I and many other Evangelicals and Catholics would say that Faith inscribes responsibility with that acceptance. If you ACCEPT CHRIST, then you must ACCEPT how Jesus said you are to live your life and live in God's will. By living in God's will you show your faith, or in other words your works reveals the depth of your faith. Now, you can be a sinner all your life and on your deathbed you ask for forgiveness and IF YOUR HEART is CONTRITE, then you will be saved. The chances of someone having a contrite heart at the end of their lives, when they have habitually said "NO" to Jesus all their lives and rejected HIM then I doubt seriously they will be saved. They will say LORD LORD, and Jesus will not know them. I think Faith is transforming and is not just a simple intellectual assent of the mind to say Jesus is my savior, yet you don't take heed to anything else that demostrates LOVE of GOD and NEIGHBOR. These are good works or they are bad works.
Catholics and many evangelicals alike agree that these "Good Works" do not earn you salvation and the Works of the "LAW" like in the OT won't do anything for you either by themselves. These "Good Works" show the fruit of your faith because they were prepared for you to do by the GRACE that God has given you. All Good works are from God, and we are only doing what is required of us IF WE HAVE FAITH.
Grace is a free gift and there is nothing we can do to earn it. We are saved by GRace through an active faith which conditions us through good works to Love God and our Neighbor as ourself.
(Even if every one in the world was part of a church that taught error, I would rather be with the truth of Christ.)
Amen, wbmoore; the great falling away continues (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
Even if every one in the world was part of a church that taught error, I would rather be with the truth of Christ. I expect many in the world to move towards a world church that will be accepting of all views and all sins, as we move towards a one world government and one world church. But I would rather be in a church of one with Christ and His truth than a church of the world with satan's lies.
It will not be too much longer before the Anglican church splits away from England because of the apostasy taught and accepted by the archbishop of Canterbury. The Episcopal churches of England and Canada will find themselves to be alone in their apostasy..
wbmoore, according to David Barrett et al, editors of the "World Christian Encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions," there are 34,000 separate Christian groups in the world today. Surely this group will be another, though while recognized by the Anglican Primate of the Southern Cone, who has fewer congregations in six countries than the Bishop of Connecticut, and only 1/3 the numbers, while they are not recognized by any of the Instruments of Unity of the larger Anglican Communion. They are a branch unto themselves.!
There is a difference between not agreeing with polity and not believing what the word of God says about faith in Christ being the only way to eternal life.
Of course, anyone who does not believe in an after life would not agree, nor would anyone who wants to justify sin.
The split reminds me of what John Milton said about England under the Puritans: "I fear that new "presbyter" is but old "priest" writ large."
The split reminds me of what Jesus himself said.
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: (Luke 12:51).
The effect of the preaching of the gospel will be division. The design of the gospel and its proper tendency is to unite mankind one to one another, to knit them together in brotherly love; if all would receive it, this would be the effect, however, there are multitudes that not only will not receive it, but oppose it.
The split reminds me of the reformation, where people tried to get the church to follow the word of God, and when they could not, they left and formed their own.
This split reminds me of what my friend tells Bible thumpers when she is accosted by them on the street: "I tell you what," she says calmly, "why don't you just go to your church, and I will go to mine.....how about that?"
"here are great people on both sides, and we are all trying to work together for the common good of the Body of Christ, but people like IGH are "Verbal" Terrorists and they must be rebuked. The Holy Spirit will lead us all into Truth as we remove the biases of old, forgive each other with an open heart, and work to be of one mind, one faith, one baptism and one Lord of all."
The Holy Spirit DOES guide us, if we are attuned to what He has to say. But to call someone a verbal terrorist is not rebuking. Paul would have been called a verbal terrorist because he spoke out against bad doctrine. This is what igh does. He usually posts scripture, because that is more effective than most anything he can say himself. If you want to rebuke him, do so. But I promise you that calling him names is not going to be effective. Guide him with scripture and love, not hostility and dismissiveness.
ihs,
As I previously mentioned in my last post . . . care to address the real issue here . . . The Gospel?
"Seminary is more than helpful, as a side note. I think it is unique to some Christian circles on our Protestant side where the pursuit of education is frowned upon and yet if you were interested in any other subject like; engineering, Medicine, science, or anything else for that matter you would have to get at minimum a Bachelors degree and then a graduate degree. Why is it that Theology is any different? "
I'm not frowning on theological education. I believe it is helpful. I do not believe it is necessary to be a person used by God to evangelize and disciple others, which is what the role of the pastor is.
I'm warning that sometimes we get filled with head knowledge about what others think about God, rather than what God thinks about God. Sometimes we get more intensely excited about what man says about God than we do about what GOD says about God. We need to be submitted to God, first and foremost.
The problem with theological education is that instead of being more on fire for God, many become more on fire for their knowledge. Instead of seeking what God wants for them, many seek what they want. instead of looking for what small corner of the world God wants them to shepherd, they look to rule it over a kingdom and change the world through their knowledge. Then they are shocked when people do not respond. This hits them in their pride, which is what got them where they are in the first place. Then they either seek God or they leave and try to do it again somewhere else.
The best thing anyone ever told me when I asked for prayer in finding the right book on a given subject, they told me they would pray I would find what God has to say about it in His word. It woke me up to the fact that I cared more about what people thought than what God thought. I am only trying to save you trouble in the future by advising that God's will and word is more important than anything, and that we get that by reading the Bible, praying, and submitting ourselves to God.
ihs, with regards to education if what you say is true I praise God I didn't get a MDiv., because I never ever want to lose my intensity and godly passion when I get in the pulpit and I don't see how one can preach or even teach the Word of God and be effective without those two qualities and to the best of my knowledge no seminary I know of offers courses in those. And to be honest I've sat under too many sermons from formally educated ministers that have about as much intensity and godly passion as a firecracker compared to an atomic bomb. Whether you mean to or not you seem to be saying that somehow all your seminary training is going to make you a great pastor and preacher, it may make you a very knowledgeable one, but only your wholehearted surrender to the Lordship of Christ and the control of the Holy Spirit can make you great and even better effectively used of God in those areas.
continued from last post:
Mat 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Mat 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Mat 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Mat 23:26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Mat 23:29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
Mat 23:30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Mat 23:31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
Mat 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
ihs, if the world would end it would concern me, because I know that millions of people will no longer have the opportunity to be saved. I believe that concerns God to and that's why the world has not ended because as Peter says it's not God's desire that any should perish but that all would be saved!
IHS said:
"but people like IGH are "Verbal" Terrorists and they must be rebuked. "
Me? a verbal terrorist? O the shame of it all! *sniffle* *sniffle*
*hangs his head in total shame*
From now on i promise to be more like my Lord Jesus, Honest. Which brings to mind this Scripture:
Mat 23:12 "And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
Mat 23:14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Mat 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Mat 23:16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
Mat 23:17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
Mat 23:18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
Mat 23:19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
Mat 23:20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
Mat 23:21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
Mat 23:22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
ihs, if my catholic experience is so unique how come just about every truly born-again believer who grew up and left the catholic church after they got saved says the same thing? Trust me this is not a coincidence but rather a pattern pointing to the fact that the catholic church as a whole does not speak to the need and the ability of a person to have a personal relationship with God through the person and finished work of His Son, Jesus Christ alone.
Believer,
In my area, 300 people is a very small Church, and 100 people would not even get you a full time Pastor. Maybe its because the cost of living is very high where I live.
Also, our church over the years use to be all about the "End Times" prophesy. We are no longer emphasizing it, but rather emphasizing being a child of God everyday.
If the world end, it doesn't bother me at all since I know where I am going and my family for that matter. I think it is more important to have a deep saving relationship with Christ, rather than pushing the whole "Left behind" garbage and fearing people into a relationship. Fear does not build a strong relationship with God, but Love does. My goal as a Pastor is to show the Love of Christ and that we can all depend on His love and that with His Grace we are saved.
Believer,
I would agree with a lot you just said. I think we've all thrown some generalities out there including generalities about your experiences with Catholics. Remember, there are still, I think, over a Billion of them so your experience may not be a control group. That doesn't diminish your experience, but I think perspective is something that should be taken into consideration.
My father told me, as I am a third generation of Pastors, that the three most important things as a Pastor are; discipleship, discipleship and discipleship. I think my dad was very wise.
I'm glad you have an MA and PhD, and Praise the Lord you are fired up for the Lord. I do think it is important to note that the more education you get the less emotional you become and the more conservative and cerebral you also become. This transformation should not be confused as having less enthusiasm for God, but rather a different way of showing it.
I know many Baptists from the SBC who I hold in high regard. I also know a lot of people who are still very conservative orthodox Presbyterians and Lutherans. Yes, their churches have split a lot but there are good ones out there who have not been swayed by today's secular onslaught of the culture war. I would say that there is division within a lot of our denominations.
I truly enjoy the Reformed Tradition very much and have not decided what type of tradition I will Pastor.
ihs, plus depending on where you live a church of 300 people in some places is seen as a large church when the average church runs maybe 100 people on any given Sunday.
Wbmoore,
Seminary is more than helpful, as a side note. I think it is unique to some Christian circles on our Protestant side where the pursuit of education is frowned upon and yet if you were interested in any other subject like; engineering, Medicine, science, or anything else for that matter you would have to get at minimum a Bachelors degree and then a graduate degree. Why is it that Theology is any different? Too many people reject education because they think they have a direct line to God and He personally tells them what the Scriptures really mean. Do you see the problem? There has to be an authoritative body who decides and not just every man for himself. It is not like you can tell a guy like IGH he is wrong, no matter how obvious it might be, because his response will be "The Holy Spirit told me". If I had a dollar for everytime I heard that? I've honestly gone to many Churches especially in Georgia, this is where some of my cousins live, where the Pastors have ZERO formation. They don't have a bachelors degree or any other education in Theology from an Accredited educational forum. I could not believe my ears at some of the stuff that was getting said at these churches and everyone, because they are even less educated than the Pastor just suck it up.
My point is that Pastors should have a high level of education combined with high degree of holiness. I believe that the Holy Spirit does guide us, but not all of us in the same way. The Holy Spirit gives different gifts. You may think you have a certain gift, but maybe you don't have it in reality.
I've been to ETS(Evangelical Theological Society) meetings. The ETS has some of the brightest minds and they are some of the most holy men I've ever met and even they are impressed by the depth of theological understanding Catholics have. In fact, there are very few people within that group who have not read at least one book by Pope Benedict and they always have a positive feeling about him probably because he is such a knowledgeable Scripture scholar. The Catholic hiearchy are some of the brightest men I've also every met with many Orthodox too. To find a Catholic Cardinal without at least 5 or 6 Masters degrees and at least 1 or 2 doctorates is rare. They are truly bright men and from personal experience very holy as well.
There are great people on both sides, and we are all trying to work together for the common good of the Body of Christ, but people like IGH are "Verbal" Terrorists and they must be rebuked. The Holy Spirit will lead us all into Truth as we remove the biases of old, forgive each other with an open heart, and work to be of one mind, one faith, one baptism and one Lord of all.
ihs, with all due respect your generalities are killing me. In your experience those "facts' you share may be true. For me personally the dullest most unethusiastic "Christians" I have ever met were those with graduate degrees. And before you say anything I have both an MA and Phd. On the other hand some of the most sincere and on-fire believers I have ever met did not even have a bachelors degree and in many cases no more than a high school diploma. All a Christian needs to be a good student of the Word of God is a reliable translation of the Bible, an English Dictionary, a Strong's Concordance, a Greek and Hebrew Dictionary, and a good conservative Bible Commentary, but most importantly a heartfelt desire to know God's Word not simply for the sake of knowledge but a desire to take that knowledge and allow God to apply it to his daily living. Plus, let us not forget that the moment a person becomes a child of God they are immediately indwelt by God's Holy Spirit and one of His responsibilities is to illumine their heart and mind with regards to the Word of God. With regards to the size of a church and discipleship there is no direct correlation. I know mega-churches that do a great job with discipleship and I know small churches that do a great job with discipleship, but I know where just the opposite is true in both the large and small church alike. Efeective discipleship is sadly lacking in a majority of churches today and we are paying the price in many ways. Until Pastors and other leaders in a church regardless of the size of the church see that the Great Commission sees evangelism and discipleship as one and until they commit themselves to joining God in fulfilling that Great Commission I'm afraid this problem will always be with us and the work of Christ will be greatly hindered.
wbmoore,
Yes, there are examples of those who are very astute, yet lack spirituality. I agree, but the vast majority of PhD's and MTh and MA in Theology are highly educated and highly fired up for God. Experience is like an opinion, everyone has one and they are all different and unique.
There are good Protestants and good Catholics and poor ones on each side this is a fact. I would say that in our church that only 30% are totally committed to Christ and I've found that number pretty consistent whether it be Lutheran, Baptist and Catholic. I will say that Churches who are smaller like those less than 300 people tend to be able to better disciple their congregants better. I also personally think that there is little discipleship offered at any large church just because of the numbers.
This is why I hope to be in charge of a very small church where I know I can make a difference.
igh, your welcome.
IHS, do not confuse knowledge with wisdom. Many who have never been past sixth grade are wiser and more loving and walking closer to God than those who have PhDs in some academic field of theology or biblical study. It is not learning what others have to say about God that matters (though it can be helpful). What matters is trusting God and learning who he is and what he has done and what he wants from us and for us through reading Him word and prayer and submitting ourselves to Him.
While seminary education is helpful, it can lead to people with lots of knowledge but little love. Another problem can be that we learn what the seminary wants to teach us, but we fail to learn what God wants to teach us. The problem can come when we prefer to study what people have said about God rather than what God says about God. Why study what people have to say about God when we have what God has to say about God? It might help us talk with others who like to worry about the minutia but it might cause us to forget that God has called us to become more like Christ, to Love Him and our brothers with all our hearts, minds, and strength. We need to study God's word, surrender to God's will, become like Christ, be in prayer.
I've heard that treasury agents do not learn how to spot fake money by looking at counterfeits, but rather they study the real thing for so long and in such detail that they recognize a counterfeit when they see it immediately. We need to be like that with the word of God.
Forgot i did read something on a one-world currency...
Step by step it comes, first regional currencies.
http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/the-coming-one-world-currency/
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55595
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=75856
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Analysts: Dollar collapse
would result in 'amero'
Think deep recession likely
How severe will the coming dollar collapse be?
"People in the U.S. are going to be hit hard," Chapman warned. "In the severe recession we are entering now, Bush will argue that we have to form a North American Union to compete with the Euro."
"Creating the amero," Chapman explained, "will be presented to the American public as the administration's solution for dollar recovery. In the process of creating the amero, the Bush administration just abandons the dollar."
Creating the Ten Kingdoms who will give there power unto the beast.
Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
Revelation 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Revelation 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."
Revelation 17:9 "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
Rev 17:13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful."
Thanks wbmoore for standing up for me.
(manly hug)
Sorry for being a bit mysterious on the stock postings.
I have God wanting me to watch this and world events.
Is this more birth pangs we are seeing? Are the Ten Kingdoms about to come forth? For the believers we understand what this means. The anti-christ will have power given unto him from the same Ten Kingdoms.
Keep an eye on world events.
ihs,
There is no doubt some common beliefs between Catholicism and Protestantism as you indicated in your post, however, I would have to take issue with the assumption that they (the Catholic hierarchy) truly holds to salvation by grace through faith in the biblical sense. There needs to be a clear definition of terms here; for example, the ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together) document uses words like grace, faith, and salvation without honestly highlighting the fact that both communions have a totally different understanding of what these mean.
My point is, they do not believe in salvation by grace through faith alone; their position is that our works ARE meritorious in contrast to our faith in Christ’s works and his atoning sacrifice. They also teach that Mary was immaculately conceived and passed on her sinless nature to Jesus which implies that his human nature is separate from our own.
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the SAME; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; (Hebrews 2:14).
Numerous examples can be given but for the sake of time and space I will not. Could you answer my second question; do we preach the same gospel?
As for catholics, I grew up in the catholic church. I was baptized - three times as a child (mom kept wanting to change god parents). I went to communion and confirmation. My maternal family are all catholic. My experience with catholics is very different from what you describe. Its been my experience, that most catholics (like most protestants) go to church once or twice a year. And for most who DO go regularly, it does not translate into their daily lives. Of course, there ARE exceptions. I know catholics who are strong believers in Christ. But its been my experience that most are not. They are catholic in name only - just as most protestants are protestant in name only. Some of the most liberal and licentious people I know are non-believers, people in certain protestant denominations, and catholics. Of course, I know conservative non-believers, protestants, and catholics as well.
My problem is not with catholic people - they're just people like everyone else, some strong believers, others not so much. My problem is the RCC teaches certain doctrines that I believe lead people away from worshipping God (some of which they have no biblical support for).
IHS,
I simply said how you were coming across - do with it what you will.
As for controlling igh, I have no control over people. The best I can do is guide them and pray for them. Correct him through scripture. Pray for him. I would guess igh, like most us, needs and would welcome your prayers. I've found nothing changes people like God working on people through His word and prayers.
Education is a good thing, especially in matters of the Bible, church history, Theology, and spiritual development. Unfortunately, most seminaries seem to fall down on the job concerning the latter. And even those that DO have something by way of spiritual development, most focus on helping you learn how to develop other people - not the spiritual needs of their students. Its been my experience that seminary does a decent job of providing knowledge, but a poor job in really preparing people to minister. You'd be surprised how many leave seminary with little or no faith.
Ministry is a spiritual battle that few of us are adequately prepared for when we leave seminary. I'll never forget the first church where I was associate pastor - it was a church plant. It was filled with white haired folks. Now, I love the elderly, and plan on being one myself. Truth be told, I'm well on my way to having my own head of white hair. :) But these folks had a mantra they liked to chant: "We've never done it that way. We can't do that. That's not how we do things in [fill-in-the-denomination]." They were quick to agree with the sermon message when they thought it applied to a certain someone, but never wanted to let God use it in their own hearts. But they did not mind going to the preacher to complain that he should not be so hard on [fill-in-the-sin] when it DID hit home. They loved to complain, and would do so to the preacher, the pastor, and anyone else. Of course the favorite game was to compliment the preacher to his face, then go behind his back complaining. And heaven help us if we tried to get them involved in a ministry, or tried to suggest different ways of ministering. It was a spiritual battle. But after much prayer, and preaching through the Bible, by the time I was called by God to leave, the place was beginning to turn around. People were beginning to look for ways to pitch in. But it was a spiritual battle I was ill prepared for - and I had knowledge, just not experience in the spiritual battle I found myself in. I pray you will spend this time in school to prepare yourself for the spiritual battle you will find yourself in.
ihs, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the PCUSA and the Episcopalian leaders pretty much required to attend seminary before they can hold a leadership role in their churches. That being the case why are their denominations splitting to pieces? Plus, unless the sacrament of confirmation has changed little if anything is said about how a person enters into a relationship with God through the person and finished work of Christ. I received confirmation as a 5th grader and was told I had become a soldier for Christ, but I was never told anything about the need to repent of my sins and turn to Christ. What I find happens is people try to make comparisons of their religion to someone elses and they say things like well that's similar to what we do but we call it such and such and yet if you were to thouroughly study their similar practice you soon find out their is very little similarity whatsoever and I believe what you were told about confirmation is a good example, plus if I'm not mistaken the age for people to receive confirmation has been raised, although I'm not totally sure what that age is. Plus, salvation is not something a person gets at a certain age but differs from person to person when they are spiritually mature enough to understand their need for a Savior and what they need to do to be saved and they are indeed ready to be saved.
wbmoore,
So I attest to the fact that IGH is ignorant and after his last posts on the stock market a little weird, and you in the same breath call me arrogant and disdainful? Hmm. Seems a little hypocritical, eh?
The Vile comments that IGH has posted is "Verbal" terrorism against Catholics. No Charity, nothing. Maybe you should lead by example and get that boy under control.
My particular church was rather anti-catholic at times. I thank God I went to Seminary because it opened my eyes to how close minded some Pastors and denominations can be. Also, my faith is supported by the Word and formed by reason. I thank God I went to graduate school because at least now I know when my pastor is giving his personal opinion versus what the Scriptures really say. In a Church where there are very few educated people, there it creates license for Pastors to twist the scriptures for their own purpose.
I have found, the more educated the staff of the Church and the members of the Church are, the less division and the more unified in doctrine you can become. Education also helps you appreciate the "Reasons" why certain denominations do things and why they don't.
By understanding our fellow Christians we can bring more Truth of Christ to society.
My seminary caters to Baptists, Non-denominationals and Reformed. I've leaned more toward the Baptist way over the years, but that may change as I've come to appreciate the Liturgical side of those Protestants from the Reformation like the Reformed Churches and some Presbyterian Churches.
Also, I have met many Catholics and the vast majority of Catholics don't speak like a Protestant for one thing. They don't use jargon like a personal relationship with Christ, which is rather contemporary Evangelical speak.
Catholics are much more conservative and more private about that relationship with Christ. The average Catholic goes to Church on Sunday and prays a lot to Jesus. They love Jesus just as much as any Baptist. They just show it differently.
They do invite Jesus into their lives. I have personally found that I've met more Catholics who still say "Grace" at all meals unlike most Protestant families at home. These same Catholics are also more willing to say "grace" at restaurants too. This was a study we did. They pray devoutly at Mass, as I have personally witnessed.
Yes, they do differ with us on Baptism. However, I've come to appreciate their Baptism/Confirmation Sacraments. Where we as an adult or young teen might get baptized once we accept Christ, Catholics and many other Protestants Baptize babies, but once they come of an age where they can "Personally"accept Christ their Baptism is "Confirmed" in the Holy Spirit and prepares them for a new life in Christ. We see the "Confirmation" of the Holy Spirit where in Acts 19:5-6 Paul imposes his hands on baptised people, and said "Receive the Holy Spirit". Also, the same happened in Acts 8:14-17. We also see it in 2 Cor 1:21-22 and Eph 1:13 and Hebrews 6:2 where baptism and the laying of hands were two sepparate things.
At Confirmation, these young Catholics accept Christ as their savior. Catholics do not, from what I've encountered, use our language. They see their relationship with Christ as an individual relationship attached in communion with the Church.
I am fortunate that over the years, especially on mission, that I've been blest to meet so many wonderful Catholics. You can go to Africa or India or anywhere, and you might think that we are the first to ever serve these people in need, when you find out we are outnumbered in the mission fields sometimes 3 to 1 by Catholics and they live a very similar Gospel to me. They live out the Beatitudes like I try.
believer, I saw the same thing when I was in seminary, and to a lesser degree in Bible college.
It is as if having learned a limited amount of information from a limited perspective leads people to believe they have a better grasp on understanding God than people who have been walking with Him all their lives. If we are not careful, seminary can feed into aspects of our sin nature, instead of helping us overcome those same sins.
Something else I've seen is while people might question for clarity in seminary, they rarely seem to question for veracity. Students often take what 'specialists' have to say as the complete and only truth on the matter, when in fact each subject or topic has at least two sides from a human pespective, and then God's side. We fail to understand that everything must be viewed from God's perspective, not our own (even though we can only do so in a limited manner). But somehow, we get it into our heads that because we have knowledge, that we know better than everyone else.
wb, the problem I'm experiencing with some men who attend seminary is a haughty spirit that leads them to believe they've got all the answers and some have become very autocratic in their leadership style. I'm not opposed to a person going to seminary and in fact I would recommend it for any person who feels called to full-time Christian service, but I would and do caution them there are many things about ministry that can't be taught or learned in seminary. Humility is one of them! For me in my own personal journey I've gleaned so much knowledge about Christian living from people who not only did not attend seminary, but in some cases didn't even graduate from college and in some cases high school.
believer
I was just speaking to a pastor the other day who told me the seminary he attended has it happen - even today.
ihs, I didn't know you were a Southern Baptist, but based on the fact that you surround yourself with the finest Christian people you must be!!:) Seriously, there are many Catholics who have never heard that they can have a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ which is the only way a person can be saved. Many also believe that when an infant is baptized they become a Christian and are saved as well which is not taught in the Bible anywhere. I do believe that there are truly born-again Christians in the catholic church, but I do not believe the catholic church for the most part preaches true biblical salvation. Plus, I have seen men who were on fire for the Lord go off to seminary and come back as cold as ice and this includes some who went to SBC seminaries back in the 70s to the mid 80s.
IHS, are you aware you are coming accross as arrogant and disdainful? I'm sure that is not your intent, but I thought I'd let you know what is being communicated.
OK igh, I KNOW you have a point, but you're being too vague even for me. :)
from msnbc:
"There's some hope by investors that Wall Street is getting closer to finding a bottom after the worst six-day rout for the Standard & Poor's 500 index since 1987. On Wednesday, the Dow gave up 189 points to close at 9,258.10 â۠and was down about 35 percent from its high of 14,164.53 reached exactly one year ago."
uh... igh? What's the point there?
Stock update from msnbc:
Market update
Index Last Change % change
• DJIA 9118.48 -139.62 -1.51%
• NASDAQ 1732.14 -8.19 -0.47%
• S&P 500 968.09 -16.85 -1.71%
"Making your grandiose assumption "
Please go read my post again. No assumption was made, simply an admonishement: some seminaries can be more focused on the knowledge and less focused on God, and I suggested you be sure you are speaking what God wants you to speak.
You are correct, not everyone can be right. However, if we base our beliefs on the Bible, we are much more likely to come close than if we add to the Bible.
Wbmoore,
As a fellow minister of the Word, I also admonish you. My seminary is very spiritual as well as intellectual. Making your grandiose assumption about my seminary seems like rhetoric. My seminary has produced some of the best preachers in the country and some of the most well respected theologians.
When pastors and priests from various christian denominations get together at the highests levels to discuss doctrine, it is only the most intellectual and spiritually gifted who can work on the most difficult issues of doctrine with other Christians. Without a strong education, it is like counting on your fingers versus using a calculator, you will not have the same ability to discern. We all pray for the Holy Spirit to guide us, and yet we all disagree. MSNCHRIS has made many good points, that the Holy Spirit is not the God of confusion, but clarity and Truth. So, someone is wrong.
As a Pastor in Training, it is important to surround myself with the brightest and most spiritual members of the body of Christ and in Truth we can create unity that Christ wanted for us.
Please don't make assumptions, because when you are wrong it makes you look less credible. Just because a few people on this board agree with each other does not mean they are right. Look beyond the small pond of this board where fundamentalism seems to thrive. Remember, it is only fundamentalists who think Catholics are not Christians and they have no voice in the greater Christian community.
Online,
We have much in common with Catholics. I say this from a Non-denominational perspective, since I do not know what group you belong to.
Here are just a few things we both accept: Jesus is fully divine and fully human at the same time, Jesus is the Son of God and He is God, we mutually believe in the Trinity which is God of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. We believe that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, we believe Christ suffered and died for our sins and on the third day rose from the dead fulfilling the Old Testament prophesies. Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah. Jesus, by His death and resurrection, opened up heaven for all mankind again. We both accept the atonement of Christ. We both accept that Christ will come again to judge the living and the dead in the second coming and final judgment of the world. We believe that all those people who have been baptized in a trinitarian format are members of the body of Christ. We believe that we are saved by Grace through faith. We both trust in Jesus Christ for our salvation, and not on our own merit.
These are just a few examples of our mutual understanding with Catholics. Also, from a moral standpoint we evangelicals have made strong partnerships with Catholics. This has proved quite successful in pursuing Godly policies in Washington DC like; protecting the unborn, the elderly, the poor, protecting traditional marriage, etc, etc. When I stand in front of an abortion clinic praying for these women to stop, the only people standing next to me are Catholics, Baptists and a few non-denominationals like me.
Moreover, Catholics are accepted as Christians by every major Protestant ecumenical institution. They are Christians. At Seminary, I've seen more issues between some Pentecostals and Baptists than I have with Catholics and other Protestant denominations.
I am currently attending the Boston Theological Union.
(We Protestants may have differences with them . . .)
Care to elaborate; Do we preach the same gospel?
IHS,
As if it added weight to what I have to say (you seem to think it does, as you mentioned it), I am a Protestant minister. I would admonish you that sometimes seminary can be too intellectual and not spiritual enough. Knowledge is a good thing, but wisdom is better. Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. I would caution you to be a strong prayer warrior, committed to God, rather than a certain point of view presented by a seminary.
I tell my children to not do what you have done: call people names.
I find igh to be refreshing, even though I disagree with him sometimes.
I happen to agree much of what igh has written.
Feel free to disagree with igh. Feel free to debate igh. Feel free to chastise him in ways that point him to God and make him more effective for God. But do not try to shut him up. I have seen him post that he feels he is led by God in doing what he does. Be certain you can say the same of yourself.
A not so surprising childish response by IGH.
Um, IHS , you spelled ignorant wrong.
:)
We should all pray for the Episcopalians, that God will keep them close to His HOLY WORD, and that if their Church falls prey to the secular powers then I pray that the vast majority of them find new homes in Churches that put the Word of God before our secular culture.
IGH,
As a Protestant Pastor in training, and a graduate seminarian, your posts are rediculous at best.
The more you post, the more you remove any doubt to your lack of reason, logic and basic understanding of other Christians.
Do yourself a big favor and stop posting your interpretive lies about the Catholic Church. We Protestants may have differences with them, but they are Christians for what we both hold as sacred and true and they hold to the basics of Christianity and they are not a cult. They are also some of our best alies when it comes to fighting; abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, cloning and other secular evils.
Also, the veracity of the websites you listed proves you do not do any homework for yourself and most of these websites are from fundamentalists who have "Extreme" views that the vast majority of Protestants do not accept. I noticed before that you actually referenced "Jack Chick". His narratives are revolting and unfounded. He is famous for taking little snipets of truth and combining them with a pork barrel of lies. He is no different than Dan Brown with the DaVinci code. Both of these men are clearly mentally unstable.
When you reference a person like "Jack Chick" it reveals the lowest form of intelligence and the extreme nature of your hateful and ignornant posts.
Seek Truth IGH, and you will find that the Catholics are Christians and you've spent all this wasteful time persecuting fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. You are in severe error about them.
What are the Characteristics of a cult?
1. Unswerving loyalty to the pope and his church. (questions are discouraged, fear of ex-communication and subsequent damnation)
2. Believe that the bread and wine are Truely Christ's body and blood or be excommunicated. (fear of damnation)
3. Do not question the pope's authority. (Charismatic leader above question no matter what he says or does.)
4. Whatever the pope says on Scripture is infallible. (God like leader, demands complete obedience.)
5. Confession of sins to only a priest.(no confession to Christ. Information can be used agaisnt you, fear tactics, blackmail.)
6. Belief your sins are not paid by Christ, you must continue to take mass, and pray for those in pergatory. (control over the 'flock' also monetary gains.)
7. Mass is mandatory for forgiveness of sins. (more control)
8. Holding to the belief 'your church is the only way to God." (hatred of those 'outsiders,' more control.)
9. Only a catholic priest can give the bread and wine.
10. All are heretics outside the catholic church.
11. Chanting the rosary. (mind control)
12. Only be a priest if celebate. (control)
13. Doctrinal control. Saying mass in latin, in former times you were not allowed to even read the Bible.
Here are some links that describe cults. Run your own search.
http://www.cultfaq.org/cultfaq-cult-definition.html
http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1341
http://www.prem-rawat-talk.org/forum/uploads/CultCharacteristics.htm
http://www.letusreason.org/culteac.htm
http://www.icsahome.com/idx_grp.asp
chris, Handbook Of Denominations In The US, page 277 under Salvation Army states, "These statements document the Army's recognition of....; the Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost:". So it appears they do believe in the Trinity.
I thought Salvation Army were methodists.
All mainline Protestants are Christians, but some offshoots from these Protestant mainline groups are not Christians like; Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Church of Christ Scientist, Scientology, Oneness Pentecostals, Salvation Army, etc. All of these groups reject the Trinity and many more doctrines of basic christianity.
Most, but not all non-denominational Christian groups are Christian. Some extreme non-denominationals focus only on Jesus and do not teach about the Trinity.
Holito,
Can you find me the word Trinity or Incarnation? To find specific words is not as important as the meaning understood by the whole of Scripture.
Also, while you can find the word "Baptist" for example as in John the Baptist, it was a description of what he did rather than a religion he founded. John only prepared the way of the Lord. You can find all the leaders of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches in the Bible from the Apostles on down to the first century. You can also trace their beliefs from the very beginning. Today's Protestants would have very little in common in belief or worship style with the Apostles or early Christians.
Here is what IS important. The earliest Christians were known as the "Way" and their leaders were the Apostles. Within a very short time this title of the "Way" went away for the title of Christian. All who followed the teachings of Christ under the Apostles were Christians. Still within the first century while some of the Apostles were still alive and ALL of their successors were alive, many heretical beliefs came about like; Jesus not being fully divine, not being fully human, not being of the flesh, etc. It became aparant like it does today that not all Christians who call themselves Christians were in fact true followers of Christ. Only those Christians who followed the direct successors of the Apostles especially Peter's line could be called Christians and they were called Catholics. Catholic means universal and it also means "According to the whole" the whole of the Apostles. The only way to differentiate true teaching from false teaching was to know who had a real connection to the Apostles, since what the Apostles taught came straight from Christ.
Still to this day, there is only one Church with the KEYS and Christ authority that is the Holy Catholic Church. You won't find any person who founded a Protestant sect in the Bible. There is no historical or belief continuity within Protestantism compared to the early Christians.
New developments from Reuters.
This just in:
"The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, presiding bishop of the U.S. church, criticized the vote in a statement, saying, "There is room in this Church for all who desire to be members of it."
She also said schism is not an "honored tradition within Anglicanism" and is "frequently been seen as a more egregious error than charges of heresy."
Katharine Jefferts Schori speaking on behalf of her father satan.
More news at ten. Ty, and have a peaceful day.
Is the Episcopalian Church the Church of Thyatira described in Revelation 2:18-29? The parallels are striking.
PastorTim, our approaches to homosexuality are dividing the churches, just as interracial marriage, the equality of women, the acceptance of usury, the prohibition of slavery, and the Divine Right of Kings has done earlier. And 100 years from now we may well look back with horror about how any Christian could accept certain views, though which views that will be only time can really tell.
It's sad to watch this soap-opera-like tragedy taking place in the Episcopal Church. Unfortunately, it will not be the last denomination to experience this kind of tragedy. I especially find it unsettling to watch the haggling over the "spoils" of the split: the church property. The extreme liberals who have taken over the mainline denominations seem to be more intent on keeping property and assets than in keeping differing beliefs in the denomination. Maybe...just maybe...the beliefs of the extremists are not as bound up in ideology as they are in power, authority and physical assets.However, they know if the assets are permitted to walk along with the individuals who are walking away from the church, the remaining "liberal extremist" church will not be able to survive on its own. That makes asset retention more critical than "blessing" of a split and departing with an amicable spirit. Church splits are historical and a part of our Christian heritage. Asset squabbling is unfortunately also a major part of those splits. How sad...how very, very sad.
holito, I can't find those but I can find Baptist in the Bible!!!:)
Interesting, I see there are arguments over titles more than doctrine. Can a member Catholic, Episcopalian, Anglican, Celtic or any titled church tell me what book in the Bible are these churches listed?
"But many said staying in the church was the only way to remedy those teachings."
Kind of like the man who stayed on the Titanic thinking that if he just bailed fast enough all would be well.
"The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, presiding bishop of the U.S. church, criticized the vote in a statement, saying, "There is room in this Church for all who desire to be members of it."
Umm, I think they just indicated whether or not they desire to be members of your church. I think some people in leadership positions really need to take the hint. Your denomination is falling apart because you departed from the path. Some supposedly intelligent people REALLY need a reality check, and fast.
sj, so what your saying is the Celtic heritage influenced the decision as opposed to had an actual role in the forming of the Anglican Church.
believer, I am sorry because most Anglicans would recognize an ongoing influence of Celtic Christianity within Anglicanism, without a doubt, like Hilda, a woman presiding over the Synod of Whitby and the obvious respect of the place of women in England compared to the male-dominated European Catholicism, or in spirituality, or episcopal authority, or monastic influence, or the place of nature, the list goes on and on.
sj, same book, Chapter 17, Christian Losses And Expansion, 590-800, page 172, "...Celtic Christians soon came in contact with the Roman Catholic Christianity expanding northward from the south of England. The two forms differed on many matters. The Celtic Christians did not acknowledge the authority of the pope....Owsy...called a meeting at Whitby in 633 to decide which form of Christianity his people would follow. Roman Christianity won the day because Owsy, according to Bede, preferred the religion that claimed to have the keys to heaven. This is the last reference made in the book to Celtic Christians in England.
sj, Christianity Through The Centuries, Chapter 11, The Church Faces The Empire And The Barbarians 375-590, page 124, "At the end of the period under discussion, Celtic Christianity had been victorious in Scotland and Ireland. It had been all but exterminated in England."
St. John's that is the first time I have heard that particular revision of history. Please cite sources.
The founding of the 'Anglican' Church begins with the Celtic Church in the second century, 400 hundred years before the arrival of Roman Catholic missionaries from Rome. Henry VIII did not found the Anglican Church. In 1533, the English Parliament did pass the Restraint of Appeals Act which forbade appeals to the Bishop of Rome, on matters like Henry's request for an annulment, which the Pope had sat upon for 4 years, without consent or denial. Still when Henry VIII died, despite this Act, the Church in England still celebrated the Mass in Latin, still required celibate clergy, and still believed in Transubstantiation. The English Reform happened over a long period of time, and was NOT the work of Henry VIII.
Yes, you are correct. Henry the 8th of England founded his own church based on the mere fact he was unable to bear a son and the Pope would not give him an anullment from his first legitimate marriage. You may divorce, although it is highly frowned upon, but you may never remarry if the first marriage was legit.
Many Anglicans should be encouraged during this time, because so many reject this modern relativisim which the Pope has said is a rejection of the Truth who is Christ. Truth is not relative. Anglicans be strong.
If I recall history, the Anglican church started as a split because the king wanted to divorce and the Pope said no. So he started his own church.
THe Episcopal leaders have said that there are more ways to heaven than just belief in Christ. THEY are the ones who have departed from teaching truth. Faith in Christ, exemplified through a changed life away from sin and towards God, is the only way to heaven.
(But those voting to leave argued they're not being extreme, just faithful to biblical teachings.)
If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? (Psalm 11:3).
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Anglican Church started as the result of a schism?
May wbmoore repent and return to preaching the Gospel.
May the Episcopal church repent and return to teaching Scripture instead of heresy.