"So you agree that “Protestants” trace their lineage back to Christ and the early Church, and that Roman Catholics aren’t the only ones who can claim a rich spiritual heritage going back 2,000+ years?"
As far as I know, ALL Christians trace their spiritual lineage back to Jesus Christ: our heritage includes, or ought to include, all of the Christian history we can get our hands on: the texts, the creeds, the councils, the catacombs and the martyrs, the great Christian teachers whose writings are still available to us from the first, second, third centuries AD, the preachers and writers from Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria, Milan, Hippo.
That constitutes a rich spiritual heritage. And it is, in a sense, more accessible now than it has been for the past 20 centuries. Our Christian family album, yours as well as mine!
"Most RC FReepers say that non-Roman Catholics trace their lineage only back to Luther, and that only Roman Catholicism goes all the way back to Jesus and His Apostles."
Find me the FReeper who says that, and I'll share the historic evidence I have. Or you do so: share the evidence, and ping me to it.
I don't know of any FReepers who would say that non-Catholics have no affinities to that historic "family" I mentioned above; for instance, Luther cited (in a positive and approving manner) various Fathers of the Church 14 times in the Augsburg Confession, and particularly admired St. Augustine, the founder of the religious order of which he had been a member. Luther even taught a course on Peter Lombard, who in turn quoted many of the Fathers. I find this fascinating! (More on that here: Concordia Theological Quarterly, first article [Link].)
"Would you say that the Baptist church down the street is an expression of Christ’s Church no less than the Roman Catholic church down the street?"
I must answer this as if I were answering my brother-in-law James, who is a Baptist pastor, my late father-in-law Robert, a Baptist and one of the founders of a local Christian school, or my husband FReeper Don-o. (You see I am surrounded by loving Baptist witnesses!)
I think that as believing Christians, Baptists are united with Christ in faith, just as I am. But the Baptist Church does not have, and does not claim to have, full and complete unity with the Church as a visible body with the Eucharist and the Sacraments and the Apostolic succession as Catholics understand those terms. Naturally, I am a Catholic because, examining the evidence, I have become convinced that the Catholic Church possesses this fullness.
But read on, brother. The Catechism says this:
|
. "Many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."
|
If you want to, you can follow this link and read more, in context. The fuller answer may interest you.
This implies that the more we share in the written word of God, and faith, and grace, and the love of Christ, the more we will grow in that unity desired by Christ.
I think my Baptist kinfolk would approve. I hope we can, too.
Uh. Did you forget something?
I do appreciate your gracious reply.
This is one key area where I disagree with Roman Catholicism, where you wrote that as a non-RC, I don’t enjoy “full and complete unity with the Church as a visible body with the Eucharist and the Sacraments and the Apostolic succession as Catholics understand those terms.”
That sentiment has been expressed before by RC FReepers (e.g., http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2654838/posts?page=32#32 ):
“While the worship of Christ outside of His church is possible, it is done in an imperfect manner befift of the sacramental graces designed to assist us thru our salvation journey.... Abandon the imperfect road to salvation and accept the apostolic church of Christ which has given us the Holy Scripture or continue to reside in a mirage of fantasy quite possibly a prisoner of Satan.”
And your catechism restates it this way: “Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church.”
And that’s precisely what I’ve been saying: That Roman Catholics think they’ve got the only real, legitimate, highest expression of Christ’s Church on earth. See, your words betray your denominational condescension:
1) You either believe that I am not in “full and complete unity” with the Bride of Christ, because Rome is not part of my religious tradition. Or
2) You’re using the term “the Church as a visible body” as a synonym for “the Roman Catholic Church.” If that’s the case, then the implication is that non-RC churches are *not* “the Church as a visible body.”
It’s really this doctrine of yours that bugs me, the doctrine inherent in Roman Catholicism, that you’re part of the real Church, and that non-Roman Catholics are not part of the real Church, or experience it in a less-than-full way.
Now, on to your skepticism about RC FReepers’ saying that “Protestants” can only trace their heritage back to Luther ... you’ve been here seven years, and probably have participated on numerous RC-related discussions, and you’ve never seen Roman Catholics trying to delegitimize non-RC FReepers by saying that our history only began in the 1500s? Really?