Nope, I have no need to claim superiority. However, the Apostolic Church DOES claim superiority. That's my point. It is simply a long standing hobby horse of mine that since the Apostolic Church claims to be absolutely superior and absolutely exclusive (yours is the only true Christian faith, etc.), then I would expect to see a reason for that in the hierarchy. While it is doubtless that countless men have served with honor and true Christian piety, I nevertheless see nothing "superior" in the men, as a whole, who have made up this superior club.
Should I bring up the countless atrocities done in the name of one's personal interpretation of scripture that came out solo scripture, the foundation of protestantism?
No need. We do not answer for all non-Apostolics who call themselves Christians. But it really wasn't my point to play "who committed the most atrocities". I don't think that matters so much. While our clergy is certainly called, they do not claim nearly the things that Apostolic clergy do. Kosta has said many times before something along the lines of "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof". My point is that I would expect to see some sort of evidence of worthiness, etc.
The Gates of hell will never prevail against the Catholic Church, just as Christ promised.
The verse says:
Matt 16:18 : And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
This is a perfect example of the superiority and exclusivity that is claimed by your Church. Christ says "my Church" which you interpret to mean ONLY your particular Church. If that's what Christ really meant, then I would expect to see a difference between "your people" and "my people". I do not. However, I DO see a difference between Christians in general (including you guys) and non-believers in general.
Dear Brother,you claim superiority without even realizing that every time you elevate what you think your own mind guides you to convince yourself that God gave you special authority make up His church in your own mind based upon your privite interpretations of Scripture.
You have convinced yourself that your personal interpretations of scripture is Holy Spirit guiding you to do so.
This is the the divinization of the mind that leads you to do this.
This personal (do it my way) spirit of protestantism proves to be founded upon the divinization of the mind because the reformers were never united of one mind with themselves and were divided against whatever makes up solo Scripture from the onset.
The reality of it all is that the authority of solo Scripture is NOT Scripture only!
It is Scripture plus the authority of whatever the human mind wants to believe what the Scriptures to mean according to the rules of themselves and the lifestyle they want to live.
This is why you have so many divisions and constant divided ever growing communities of protestantism in its short history
They sure like to mangle, toss aside those 400 years of true history, don’t they.
RUBBER HISTORY BOOKS INDEED.
In so many words? Across the board superiority? I really don't think so.
I ask not to pick nits but because I want the claims to be understood precisely. I'd be glad if I understood 'em precisely myself, as a matter of fact.
I've said before, one would think that the best way to assess hospitals would be on length of stay and mortality rates. But one of the reasons good hospitals lose a lot of patients is that they get the ones no one can heal.
I used to say to myself, "Don't confuse the salesman with the product." Now I'd add, and don't confuse the customers with the product either. The weak, the not very thoughtful, those who relapse into sin often ( Margaret of Cortona comes to mind) MAY come to the RC Church because they can't even pronounce pre-destination, but they can hear that God loves them, they can experience that love in the sacraments and devotions, and little by little, in ways marred by habitual vices and disabilities, they may show only to God and the really discerning the spiritual change in their lives, while all we note is the garrulousness, querulousness, and B.O..
Christ says "my Church" which you interpret to mean ONLY your particular Church. If that's what Christ really meant, then I would expect to see a difference between "your people" and "my people".
Um, we have more parties? with better wine? (Okay, The Episcopalians have us beat on that ....)
But seriously, it would be nice if our adversaries more often took the trouble to hurl back at us what we really do say, and not paraphrases which, intentionally or not, end up being tendentious. It is especially remarkable since there was a great deal of Protestant outrage over the "clarifications" to Dominus Iesus when they came out. I can't find the thread now.
I THINK what we say is there IS only one Church, period. The "fullness" of that one Church and her benefits (for example, all the sacramental means of grace) is available in the catholic Church (NOT just the RCC). Other ecclesial assemblies have access to a hindered communion with the catholic Church and similarly impeded access to the sacramental means of grace. For example baptism and (I think marriage (under certain broad circumstances -- for example, no RCC person has suggested that the boss-lady and I need to get re-married) are valid and bona fide and so forth.
That is not the same as, it's different in important ways from, saying that we are the ONLY Church and you are no church at all.
Further -- I tried this before -- the clergy do not claim so to speak "personal" gifts. Ordained, they rise up from their knees the same idiotic poltroons that they were when they knelt before the bishop. But now they are idiotic poltroons marked with and for an office.
Clipping a dog's ears may in fact hinder rather than help him track with his nose (since a hound's ears trap air around his face so he can enjoy the bouquet of eau de deer-poop or fox-sweat) but it won't change his orneriness. Neither will the "character indelibilis" of ordination make a tractable and intelligent poodle out of a froward mutt. It'll just make a mutt with tidy ears.
We trumpet from as high and acoustically gifted a place as we can, "We have this treasure in earthen vessels!" Indeed one of the proofs of the earthen-ness is not the simplicity of a Cure d'Ars or the persistence of a DeSales, but the asininity of the priest or bishop or cardinal or abbot who acts like he's the bees-knees.
One more wheeze: Abbots and Bishops present themselves to Dominic to assist, they say, in the work of evangelism. They have retinues and are splendidly mounted. We all admit this is embarrassing. But if we must boast in our men, let us first acknowledge the luxurious clergy and only then boast in Dominic who not only invites but persuades these men who want to lord it over others to send their horses and retinues home and to join him barefoot on the road.
We may have suffered with the shame of slave-holding Jebbies, but we also have a bishop who put a southern parish under interdict when it refused to integrate. That's not so very shabby.
But I guess I can see how one might think we do.