God caused the Bible to be written in the same way God cause every other holy deed: hymns composed, liturgies put together, cathedrals built, etc. In all cases the human authors were moved by the Holy Ghost and produced a miracle. It is the Church operating through its councils, in its inerrancy, that selected the writings that are inspired and left others as a supplement.
In the case of the New Testament we have clear signals that at least some of the books are writings for private consumption. Luke writes his gospel to Theofilus, who has already received instruction in the living Word to confirm him in his knowledge (Luke 1:1-4). St. Paul frequently puts personal requests in his letters, as in 2 Timothy 4:9-22. He often refers to his oral teaching in his letters, as in 2 Corinthians 13:10; in 2 Thessalonians he expressly instructs the elders to hold fast to the oral teaching (2 Thessalionians 2:14).
But does popularity make it correct?
Ultimately, the test of correctness is whether a holy work brings people to Christ. If a particular writing -- for example, some rash passages from St. Augustine on free will that he later himself corrected, -- lead people to schism, then they cannot be correct, and they will not be reflective of the consensus of the fathers. Numerical popularity is a secondary effect.
I only recognize my church inasmuch as it is in Christ, not in the writings of any man
That is fine, but the writings of the fathers prove historical continuity of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
I'm pretty sure that you all have said that an infant baptism performed in a Protestant church "CAN" be effective. However, what do Catholics say happens to victims of abortion, or to any child who dies before the age of reason (and living in a non-Christian family)? Are the salvations of those children really mainly determined by their parents?
Protestant baptisms are valid (excepting some fringe denominations). In fact, in an emergency, anyone, even a non-Christian can perform valid baptism. A baptized child who dies goes to heaven automatically as he is cleansed of the Original Sin and did not commit any personal sin. An unbaptized child is at the mercy of Christ: we do not have a promise of his salvation, and likewise for unbaptized adult who has lead a righteous life. We only have a promise of salvation through baptism. The choice to be baptized must be present indeed: in the case of an adult, he has to wish to be baptized; in the case of the child, his parents must wish so.
Good works automatically flow from a regenerated heart
The Church teaches that works also assist in the regenerative work. One who does charity for some wrong reason, for example, because he mistakenly believes in salvation through works, will eventually be drawn to Christ and develop and strengthen his faith. It is true that works alone do not save, but neither faith alone saves.
elaborate?
Historically, the public school system in America was promulgated in 19 century in order to offset the influence the Catholic Church had in primary education. I can try and google up some articles on that later.
trying to blame Protestantism for what happened to Terri Schiavo???
Not for that incident, of course. I am aware fo the fact the the blind judge was excommunicated by his Baptist church. I mean merely that we in America have moved to the system of justice that is divorced from the moral law: ultimately, the voters decide what is moral and what is not, and they vote, and then the people they elected, or the people appointed by those who got democratically elected, make law and that law becomes morality. So, abortion is "moral" because it's legal, and marijuana is "immoral" because it is not legal. This pattern, that an individual can decide for himself what the Natural law in his heart says, follows the Protestant pattern where the individual can decide for himself what the Divine Law says. The apostolic churches believe that the Church is the deposit of Divine Law and is the only source of moral law, no matter what the democratic sentiment is at any moment.
Anglicans, the Church of England, etc. are all fully Protestant
They lost their apostolicity, yes. As to contraception, it is of course a wider fault than just the protestants, but the defection of Protestant churches made the struggle extremely difficult for Catholics.
Not only much of the New Testament is private correspondence, but its incompleteness is expressly stated, see John 21:25.
Actually, that was not the early Church criterion. The early Church considered all works of Apostles as inspired and tose were the works that were read out loudly in churches (see also my post 2111).
We only have a promise of salvation through baptism
The Gospels say that only those who are baptized and believe shall be saved; but those who do not believe shall not be saved. Therefore, baptism is not the promise of salvation. Likewise, a child cannot believe even if he or she is baptized.
Baptism restores our free will so that we can choose. Baptism is not a some kind of a "spell" that saves us. It is grace of the Holy Spirit that cleanses (washes) us spiritually. Without baptism, our judgemnt is occluded and distorted. Those who are baptized and sin do so of their own choice.
I would respectfully disagree that a beautiful hymn has the same hand of God behind it that the book of John does. Do you see all hymns composed, liturgies written, and cathedrals built as definitionally perfect? (Do you see the Bible as definitionally perfect?) It appears that you believe that God turned over His authority to select His written revelation to man, to the Church. I would say He retained His authority for Himself. Is the Church a greater authority than the Bible?
In the case of the New Testament we have clear signals that at least some of the books are writings for private consumption. Luke writes his gospel to Theofilus, who has already received instruction in the living Word to confirm him in his knowledge (Luke 1:1-4).
Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point, but by this reasoning, aren't all Paul's letters written to specific audiences, and are thus not applicable to the rest of us Christians? Do we need to pay heed to anything in James since he only wrote to Jewish Christians?
Ultimately, the test of correctness is whether a holy work brings people to Christ.
If you and I met the same man, and we each gave him an opposite teaching, would you judge the correctness of the teaching by which of us convinced the man? That can't be right. We even define "coming to Christ" differently. I would say the test of correctness is whether God says it's true.
Protestant baptisms are valid (excepting some fringe denominations). In fact, in an emergency, anyone, even a non-Christian can perform valid baptism.
Thanks for your answer. It's funny, my wife and I are fans of the show "Lost". This situation just came up on their isolated island. If you're not a fan, someone had a vision that the baby needed to be baptized in case something terrible happened, so that the baby's soul would be safe. The only one available who claimed to be qualified did know some scripture, but was actually a hardened drug dealer, killer, etc., and was unconvincing as a Christian, but did have redeeming qualities. The sprinkling was done by the drug dealer, and the music told us that it was successful. Since the brother of the drug dealer actually was a legitimate priest (clarifying that this was supposed to be Catholic), I laughed with my wife on whether Catholics would like this portrayal or not. :) I honestly don't know.
Historically, the public school system in America was promulgated in 19 century in order to offset the influence the Catholic Church had in primary education.
Well, I don't know the history, but I can tell you that among non-Catholics, today, your best buddies in the world are evangelical Protestants in promoting faith-based education.
This pattern, that an individual can decide for himself what the Natural law in his heart says, follows the Protestant pattern where the individual can decide for himself what the Divine Law says. The apostolic churches believe that the Church is the deposit of Divine Law and is the only source of moral law, no matter what the democratic sentiment is at any moment.
I don't agree this is a valid criticism. Under communism, everyone is bound to follow the hierarchy. The will of the spirits of the people is subjugated to the State because only the State has the authority to proclaim truth. Violation of any doctrine of the hierarchy subjects a person to severe punishment. Therefore, it is clear that Catholicism is like communism. Have I treated you fairly? :) I also think NOT!
We do not believe that truth is determined by a vote of men. I could argue that is what you believe! We do not believe that we decide for ourselves what is truth. I understand that you believe that God has deposited "the truth" into the hands of a very select few men. We believe that God has done the same thing, but just to "more" men. :)