This is unadulterated rubbish. It was the Catholic Church, based on Petrine authority, that affirmed the canonical texts in AD 382. This was the case for eleven centuries. Petrine authority did not vanish live a dove taking flight with the advent of the Reformation.
For example in Matthew 18: 20
“For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them.”
The term “in my name: has royal meaning. It is understood as meaning “in all what I teach.”
Christ taught ONE truth and established ONE Church for ALL times, and it has ONE Credo.
We don’t need 30,000 variations of Protestantism instructing different interpretations.
This is captured very well by Dr. A. David Anders, who was born, raised and educated, as an Evangelical Protestant and studied Wheaton College. He set out deliberately to show why Catholicism was wrong. He ended up a Catholic convert. Here is his short summary of his journey,
PROTESTANTISM: A CONFUSED MASS OF INCONSISTENCIES
AND TORTURED LOGIC
“By the time I finished my Ph.D., I had completely revised my understanding of the Catholic Church. I saw that her sacramental doctrine, her view of salvation, her veneration of Mary and the saints, and her claims to authority were all grounded in Scripture, in the oldest traditions, and in the plain teaching of Christ and the apostles.
I also realized that Protestantism was a confused mass of inconsistencies and tortured logic. Not only was Protestant doctrine untrue, it bred contention, and could not even remain unchanged.
What does grace mean to you?
Catholicism is as Catholicism does.
And right now, this Francis fellow is doing more to put that whole ‘infallibility’ thing into question than any Pope since the Renaissance.
The Catholic Church emerged the winner out of the Dark Ages because it preserved Roman culture.
What culture, if any, is the present day Catholic Church and its Pope preserving and promoting?
As a LAtin Rite Catholic (the term “Roman Catholic” was coined to sow distrust), I dismiss anything claiming that “the Roman Catholic Church is the One Tru Church”. For starters, there are Eastern Rite Catholic Churches that are as “Catholic” as the Latin Rite.
It was the Catholic Church, based on Petrine authority,
Could you provide some scripture from Peter concerning the communion?
To the contrary, Jesus himself said Mary was no more special than we are:
Matthew 12:46-50: (46)While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. (47)Someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."(48)But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" (49)And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold My mother and My brothers! (50)"For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother."
1. Rome affirming the canonical texts in AD 382 (which depends upon the Decretum Gelasianum, the authority of which is disputed (among RC's themselves), based upon evidence that it was pseudepigraphical, being a sixth century compilation put together in northern Italy or southern France at the beginning of the 6th cent. In addition the Council of Rome found many opponents in Africa.” More: http://www.tertullian.org/articles/burkitt_gelasianum.htm) meant the canon was indisputably settled - which it definitely was not until after the death of Luther- or that being the steward of Scripture as the historical magisterium means such must be the infallible authority on what it consists of and means. Which is manifestly false. Argue to the contrary if you want.
That what a pope is alleged to have done or did somehow means that such is the successor of Peter, while the fact is that the NT never recorded or taught any apostolic successors (like for James: Acts 12:1,2) after Judas who was to maintain the original 12: Rv. 21:14) or elected any apostolic successors by voting, versus casting lots (no politics). (Acts 1:15ff)
For example in Matthew 18: 20 “For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them.”
Which utterly fails to teach the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility (EPMI) which is what must be proved, as the preceding judgment actually had to do with settling personal disputes, though in principle it can extend to corporate issues, and which flows from the OT magisterium which had such authority that dissent was a capital offense. (Dt. 17:8-13)
The fact is that EPMI was never essential for the discernment and preservation of Truth, and in fact the NT church began upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, not the premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility. In principal the church of imperial Rome is built upon the Scribes and Pharisees, which like Rome, excluded the validity of any itinerant preachers, while the church began upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, both of which much opposed the magisterium which sat in authority of Israel, the stewards of Scripture, and recipient of the promises, etc. (Mt. 23:2; Rm. 3:2; 9:4,5)
The term “in my name: has royal meaning. It is understood as meaning “in all what I teach.”
Scripturally (look it up) it means to do or say something as representing the Lord, whether falsely (including Rome and other false teachers) or true, and was valid even though one was not part of the company of the apostles.
But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. (Mark 9:39)
For while the judicial judgment of Mt. 18:15-18 applies to the church as a formal judiciary, the spiritual power of binding and loosing is provided for all righteous believers. Thus while interceding for sick members principally applies to the presbuteros (not hiereus=priests), the general exhortation is to "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much," (James 5:16) which applies to all righteous believers of faith. Thus the example of Elijah, who was not part of the OT magisterium, and bound the heavens for 3.5 years, and loosed them afterwards .
Christ taught ONE truth and established ONE Church for ALL times, and it has ONE Credo.
Indeed, basically speaking, and evangelicals have historically been foremost contenders for basic Scriptural Truths we both assent to, and against those who deny them, which typically effectively operate according to the Roman model for the veracity of Truth claims.
But to which core truths the credo of Rome adds extraScriptural and unScriptural teachings to, while her unity is actually quite limited and largely on paper,
We don’t need 30,000 variations of Protestantism instructing different interpretations.
Indeed, and besides the specious number , it is amazing how RCs on one hand will argue against Protestantism as a monolithic institution when arguing against what they say they believe, while on the other hand have such a broad definition of Protestant that is so wide you can drive a Unitarian Scientology Swedenborgian Unification 747 thru it.
And as such it is basically meaningless, as it includes those who deny even the most fundamental aspect of the Reformation, that of holding to the supreme authority of Scripture as the wholly inspired and accurate word of God, and such believers testify to far greater unity in Biblical,conservative core beliefs than the overall fruit of Rome.
And indeed, besides basically separating herself from the NT due to her fundamental basis for the veracity of Truth claims, and subsequent teachings , Catholicism exists in schisms and sects, with different brands of Catholicism, even btwn popes and councils. (And infallible teachings are a minority part of RC doctrine, and see interpretation.) Thus if RCs were formally divided according such then you would have thousands of Catholic churches, However, while various sects of Catholicism are implicitly sanctioned, yet as one cannot formally separate in fellowship from Rome without being in schism, then RCs must remain as brethren with even proabortion.sodomite/Muslim RCs and prelates.
Thus RCs are guilty of not obeying the Scriptural command to separate from such, and from false doctrine, unlike evangelicals can and have done in obedience to God:
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?. And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. (2 Corinthians 6:14-16)
Division because of Truths which evangelicals overall concur on, is better than unity in error, which RCs overall concur on.
This is captured very well by Dr. A. David Anders, who was born, raised and educated, as an Evangelical Protestant and studied Wheaton College.
This is captured very well by Norman Geisler (Ph.D. in philosophy from Loyola University): So, while we are losing a few intellectual egg-heads out the top of evangelicalism to Rome, we are gaining tens of thousands of converts out the bottom from Catholicism. The trade-off highly favors evangelicalism. - http://ephesians4-15.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-roman-catholics-are-leaving-church.html
Scripturally, it was the common people who heard Jesus gladly, while the learned overall rejected Him. Elitist Rome which attracted this deceived fool, manifests an attitude toward those who dissent from her like that of the proud elitist Pharisees:
Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. (John 7:47-49)
Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him. (Proverbs 26:12)
Not only was Protestant doctrine untrue, it bred contention, and could not even remain unchanged.
Welcome to Catholicism, which not only changes on the papal and conciliar level, and thus the SSPX and SSPV type groups who substantively charge this, but abounds in divisions beneath the veneer of unity. And in error.
Thank GOD for this statement!
It explains how that fallible men can vote and ELECT, by a majority, an infallible pope.
(On certain things; that is...)
Well stated. The Catholic Church is the Energizer bunny going and keeps going for 2000 years. It’s what Christ stated, why keep kicking against the goad? Peter, the first Pope, summed it up when Jesus asked, “Do you want to leave?”, “Where shall we go, you have the words of everlasting life.”
I find this post of your interesting. Could you tell me the “ONE TRUTH” that Christ taught? Do you one body of truth? Where would I find the truth that your are speaking of? Or are you speaking of the gospel that Christ taught Peter and the 12? Is that the truth that He established His “One Church” with?