Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: aMorePerfectUnion
In Romanism - sola ecclesia - or sola magisterium, you simply outsource belief to Rome.…How could they and support the dogma of sola Rome?

I must take exception to this characterization. First, it is not sola ecclesia. The Catholic Church fully recognizes the authority of the Bible. Where Protestants accuse us of departing from the Bible in truth is departing from Protestant interpretations of the Bible. The many debates here on FR about the meaning of various Bible passages highlights this. Secondly, while Protestants like to portray Catholicism as only Rome, in truth it is the entire Catholic Church. This ecumenical or universal nature of the Church is seen in the exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium of church teaching and in the Extraordinary Magisterium of church councils. Yes, the pope does exercise a unique role but it is only as the head of the universal church.

Rome resisting liberalism? The evidence in her parishes contradicts this. In Belgium alone, more than 80% of Romans never darken the door of a church. Here in the USA, many studies show Romans do not believe the teachings of Rome.

Yes, I acknowledge the damage done by Modernism at the academic and popular levels. But this was because of the reluctance of church authorities after Vatican II to discipline dissent. But these errors were never accept by the Magisterium. Catholics could always discover the falsehood of what was being taught locally by referring to official documents of the church. A rejection of a false "Spirit of Vatican II" is now taking place but it will take time for this to spread in the pews. The younger clergy now being ordained are particularly devoted to orthodox teaching. But this appeal to a magisterial authority is lacking within Protestantism where disagreement leads to fragmentation.

Protestantism is a broad word the way you wield it. Groups of liberals are cut off like cancer from Bible believing Christian groups - yet it serves the purpose of many Romans to set them up as straw men.

I do indeed recognize the broad split between Bible-believing (evangelical/fundamentalist) Protestants and their liberal cousins but they are both the heirs of the Reformation. Sola scriptura planted the seed of subjectivism which lead to liberal Protestantism and we find this liberalism residing in historically Protestant denominations such as Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutheran, etc. Without the Reformation this liberal Protestantism would not exist.

Sola Scriptura - the belief that inspired Scripture is sufficient for salvation, maturity and doctrine - has led to deep faith, the evangelization of the earth, ekklesia around the world, etc.

More nations were brought to Christ through the ages by the Catholic Church than by Protestantism which is why the Catholic Church now has over one billion members world-wide. Indeed, all of the Protestant nations of Europe were first evangelized by the Catholic Church.

Protestantism doesn’t “seek to place authority in God alone.” It recognizes that His authority is over us. His Word is the last Word in all matters of faith and practice.

Actually it is the individual's personal interpretation of the Bible that becomes the last word. Thus the fragmentation of Protestantism.

Cancerous offshoots are cut off.

And which denomination of Protestantism is the true ekklesia which has cut off all the others, and how large is it compared to the full number of those who call themselves Christian?

135 posted on 06/14/2014 9:09:48 AM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]


To: Petrosius

Lots of points to respond to so I will try to be brief to save you and I time!

“I must take exception to this characterization. First, it is not sola ecclesia.”

... Well, if you include anything in addition to the Bible and set up the non-Biblical magisterium to be the only source of accuracy, it is effectively solo ecclesia.

“The Catholic Church fully recognizes the authority of the Bible.”

...except where they want to add non-Biblical doctrines out of thin air. Except where they want to find support for a preexisting pagan idea by using the see and say method.

“while Protestants like to portray Catholicism as only Rome, in truth it is the entire Catholic Church.

... actually I use rome not as an insult, but to preserve the actual meaning of “universal church” as meaning everyone believer who makes up the body and bride of Christ - instead of just those in a Christian religion ruled from rome.

“This ecumenical or universal nature of the Church is seen in the exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium of church teaching and in the Extraordinary Magisterium of church councils. Yes, the pope does exercise a unique role but it is only as the head of the universal church.”

... well, we can agree the “pope” has a unique role over churches that submit to rome.

“Yes, I acknowledge the damage done by Modernism at the academic and popular levels. But this was because of the reluctance of church authorities after Vatican II to discipline dissent. But these errors were never accept by the Magisterium.”

... any teaching not enforced is a hobby.

“Catholics could always discover the falsehood of what was being taught locally by referring to official documents of the church.”

... discovering without enforcement is simply theory.

“But this appeal to a magisterial authority is lacking within Protestantism where disagreement leads to fragmentation.”

It is cleaner. Agree with Scripture or get packing. Faster too.

“I do indeed recognize the broad split between Bible-believing (evangelical/fundamentalist) Protestants and their liberal cousins but they are both the heirs of the Reformation.”

... here I will disagree gently. While many churches came from the reformation relatives, most churches started today are direct offshoots from Christ. I suppose your theory will fairly call Rome the Mother of the Reformation.

“Sola scriptura planted the seed of subjectivism”

...again, gently disagree. It spawns a conversation about what God revealed and what it means. Both good conversations to have.

“which lead to liberal Protestantism and we find this liberalism residing in historically Protestant denominations such as Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutheran, etc. Without the Reformation this liberal Protestantism would not exist.”

... then to be fair, you will have to concede that “the authority of the ministerium leads to liberal catholicism and we find this liberalism resididing in historically roman groups such as those who want to make Mary the fourth member of the godhead, those with lesbian priests, etc. Without the magisterium and its ruling on theology, rome would not exist.”

...You sowed the seeds and must reap the fruit.

“More nations were brought to Christ through the ages by the Catholic Church than by Protestantism which is why the Catholic Church now has over one billion members world-wide.”

... Christ didn’t command us to go to “nations”. The specific instructions are to every tribe, people, tongue and nation. Somewhere around 16,000 people groups remain. They are targeted and being reached. By “protestants.”

...When your past is bigger than your future, the end is near.

... Perhaps the real answer about the billion members is that half don’t participate any more. I’m not sure what membership means to you or rome, but I would personally be quite discouraged.

“Indeed, all of the Protestant nations of Europe were first evangelized by the Catholic Church.”

... Sure. You can see the shape they are in now - despite the magisterium. I will also add that evangelicals are planting churches now in Europe to lead those nations back to Christ.

“Actually it is the individual’s personal interpretation of the Bible that becomes the last word. Thus the fragmentation of Protestantism.”

... actually, no. God has gifted the ekklesia with “teachers” and the Holy Spirit in every member.

“And which denomination of Protestantism is the true ekklesia which has cut off all the others, and how large is it compared to the full number of those who call themselves Christian?”

...EVERY single ekklesia that teaches the Gospel of Grace is comprised of actual members of the body and bride of Christ. As such, it is part of the universal church of all time.

... until the final day, we will not know how many shoots of wheat vs. how many tares. God knows now and will reveal it later. We can hear words of testimony. We can see lives changed. We can see good works. All of those can be fake, as we know. Only God knows.

... what we do know is that in the end, God will reveal it. Until then, it is a church on the march, sending our budget to the unreached, sharing the Gospel here and abroad, building up believers and helping them use their gifts.

... never about a “correct” church. Always about Him, His glory, His Gospel of Grace.


136 posted on 06/14/2014 10:59:11 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion ( "I didn't leave the Central Oligarchy Party. It left me." - Ronaldus Maximus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson