It is the Decision of the Holy Spirit and Us – A Reflection on the Catholicity of the Early Church

Archdiocese of Washington ^ | 05-17-17 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

It is the Decision of the Holy Spirit and Us – A Reflection on the Catholicity of the Early Church

Msgr. Charles Pope • May 17, 2017 •

The first readings at daily Mass this week recount the Council of Jerusalem, which scholars generally date to around 50 A.D. It was a pivotal moment in the history of the Church, because it would set forth an identity for Her that was independent of the culture of Judaism per se and would open wide the door of inculturation to the Gentiles. This surely had a significant effect on evangelization in the early Church.

Catholic ecclesiology is evident in this first council in that we have a very Catholic model of how a matter of significant pastoral practice and doctrine is properly dealt with. What we see here is the same model that the Catholic Church has continued to use right up to the present day. In this and all subsequent ecumenical councils, there is a gathering of the bishops, presided over by the Pope, that considers and may even debate a matter. In the event that consensus cannot be reached, the Pope resolves the debate. Once a decision is reached, it is considered binding and a letter is issued to the whole Church.

All of these elements are seen in this first council of the Church in Jerusalem, although in seminal form. Let’s consider this council, beginning with some background.

1. Bring in the Gentiles! Just prior to ascending, the Lord gave the Apostles the great commission: Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). The Gentiles were now to be summoned and included in the ranks of discipleship and of the Church.
2. The Church was mighty slow in beginning any outreach to the Gentiles. While it is true that on the day of Pentecost people from every nation heard Peter’s sermon, and more than 3000 converted, they were all Jews (Acts 2). In fact, there seems little evidence of the Church moving far from Jerusalem let alone to all the nations.
3. Perhaps as a swift kick in the pants, the Lord allowed a persecution to break out in Jerusalem after the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7). This caused the gospel to begin a northward trek, into Samaria at least. Samaritans, however, are not usually considered Gentiles, because they were a group that had intermarried with Jews in the 8th century B.C. There was also the baptism of an Ethiopian official, but he, too, was a Jew.
4. Fifteen Years? The timeline of Acts is a bit speculative. However, if we study it carefully and compare it to some of what Paul says (especially in Galatians), it would seem that it was between 12 and 15 years before the baptism of the first Gentile took place! If this is true, then another nudge or push from the Lord was surely needed. There was strong racial animosity between Jews and Gentiles, which may explain the slow response to Jesus’ commission. Although it may explain it, it does not excuse it. However, the Lord does not fail to guide His Church.
5. Time for another kick in the pants. This time the Lord goes to Peter, who was praying on a rooftop in Joppa, and by means of a vision teaches him that he should not call unclean what God calls clean. The Lord then sends to Peter an entourage from Cornelius, a high Roman military official seeking baptism. Cornelius, of course, is a Gentile. The entourage requests that Peter accompany them to meet Cornelius at Cesarea. At first, he is reluctant, but then recalling the vision (the kick in the pants) that God gave him, Peter decides to go. In Cesarea, he does something unthinkable: Peter, a Jew, enters the house of a Gentile. He has learned his lesson and as the first Pope has been guided by God to do what is right and just. After a conversation with Cornelius and the whole household as well as signs from the Holy Spirit, Peter baptizes them. Praise the Lord! It was about time. (All of this is detailed in Acts 10.)
6. Many are not happy with what Peter has done and they confront him about it. Peter explains his vision and also the manifestation of the Holy Spirit, insisting that this is how it is going to be. While it is true that these early Christians felt freer to question Peter than we would the Pope today, it is also a fact that what Peter has done is binding even if some of them don’t like it; what Peter has done will stand. Once Peter has answered them definitively, they reluctantly assent and declare somewhat cynically, “God has granted life giving repentance even to the Gentiles!” (Acts 11:18)
7. Trouble is brewing. The mission to the Gentiles is finally open, but that does not mean that the trouble is over. As Paul, Barnabas, and others begin to bring in large numbers of Gentile converts, some among the Jewish Christians begin to object that they are not like Jews and insist that the Gentiles must be circumcised and follow the whole of Jewish Law—not just the moral precepts but also the cultural norms, kosher diet, purification rites, etc. (That is where we picked up the story in yesterday’s Mass.)
8. The Council of Jerusalem – Luke, a master of understatement, says, “Because there arose no little dissension and debate …” (Acts 15:2) it was decided to ask the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem to gather and consider the matter. So the Apostles and some presbyters (priests) with them meet. Of course Peter is there as is James, who was especially prominent in Jerusalem among the Apostles and would later become bishop there. Once again, Luke rather humorously understates the matter by saying, “After much debate, Peter arose” (Acts 15:7).

Peter arises to settle the matter because, it would seem, the Apostles themselves were divided. Had not Peter received this charge from the Lord? The Lord had prophesied, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to sift you all like wheat but I have prayed for you Peter, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers (Luke 22:31-32). Peter now fulfills this text, as he will again in the future and as will every Pope after him. Peter clearly dismisses any notion that the Gentiles should be made to take up the whole burden of Jewish customs. Paul and Barnabas rise to support this. Then James (who it seems may have felt otherwise) rises to assent to the decision and asks that a letter be sent forth to all the Churches explaining the decision. He also asks for and obtains a few concessions.

So there it is, the first council of the Church. That council, like all the Church-wide councils that would follow, was a gathering of the bishops in the presence of Peter, who worked to unite them. At a council a decision is made and a decree binding on the whole Church is sent out—very Catholic, actually. We have kept this biblical model ever since that first council. Our Protestant brethren have departed from it because they have no pope to settle things when there is disagreement. They have split into tens of thousands of denominations and factions. When no one is pope, everyone is pope.

A final thought: Notice how the decree to the Churches is worded: It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us (Acts 15:28). In the end, we trust the Holy Spirit to guide the Church in matters of faith and morals. We trust that decrees and doctrines that issue forth from councils of the bishops with the Pope are inspired by and authored by the Holy Spirit Himself. There it is right in Scripture, the affirmation that when the Church speaks solemnly in this way, it is not just the bishops and the Pope speaking as men, it is the Holy Spirit speaking with them.

The Church—Catholic from the start!

[MHGinTN]

The snatching away ... coming soon to a planet near home. Woe to those who are not snatched away. They may still end up in Heaven (Revelation says so) but they will likely lose their head getting there when they call upon The Lord during antiChrist’s reign.

[Elsie]

That’s the role we were given to play.

[daniel1212]

We trust that decrees and doctrines that issue forth from councils of the bishops with the Pope are inspired by and authored by the Holy Spirit Himself.

Wrong: unlike Catholic councils and popes, Scripture is wholly inspired of God and has Him as its Author, and even in RC theology we read:

Inspiration signifies a special positive Divine influence and assistance by reason of which the human agent is not merely preserved from liability to error but is so guided and controlled that what he says or writes is truly the word of God, that God Himself is the principal author of the inspired utterance; but infallibility merely implies exemption from liability to error. God is not the author of a merely infallible, as He is of an inspired, utterance; the former remains a merely human document. ..not that either the pope or the Fathers of the Council are inspired as were the writers of the Bible or that any new revelation is embodied in their teaching. (Catholic Encyclopedia>Infallibility; http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm. emp. mine.

[daniel1212]

I seem to recall someone posting on one of these Catholic vs Protestant threads a list of times where Paul spoke authoritatively. (?) I have been meaning to look into that as well, if you or anyone has such a list thanks in advance.

You may be referring to this parody: Triablogue: 51 Biblical Proofs Of A Pauline Papacy And Ephesian Primacy

The Peter of Rome is not that of Scripture , that of the street-level leader among the apostles and initially that of the church. Paul was hardly RC in his writings, rarely mentioning the supposed supreme head of The Church, never enjoining obedience to him or prayers for him in particular, etc. or otherwise describing him as a RC pope, and listing him after James as one of 3 who appeared to be pillars, and then publicly rebuking him.

[Elsie]

We can say it in five lines; I guess.
If we don’t, it is REALLY a mess!
Most contain some fine truth;
if it don’t: well FORSOOTHE!
But it’s fun, I must simply confess.

[Elsie]

It appears that some are more easily “guided” than others.

[Elsie]

Where is the word rapture?
Where is the word sola scriptura?

Good point.

But what she REALLY means is...

Where is the CONCEPT of pope?

We can PROVE the concept of Rapture, and Sola.

[Elsie]

We TarBabies should NEVER reply to a passing rabbit.

[Elsie]

I’ve found it quite helpful to let the lying dogs sleep as well.

[Elsie]

You sound like a person who; if an apparition that called itself The Virgin Mary appeared to you; you'd not believe it.

--Catholic_Wannabe_Dude(Hail Mary!!)

[Mark17]

Why anyone would think to put that on the same level as written Scripture is beyond me.

Don't they actually put tradition ABOVE written scripture?

[Elsie]

Lotsa folks kinda ignore Paul's writings; but they claim adherence to what is claimed that JESUS said...

Luke 17:34-35     English Standard Version (ESV)

 ³⁴ I tell you, in that night there will be two in one bed. One will be taken and the other left. ³⁵ There will be two women grinding together. One will be taken and the other left.”

 

Matthew 24:40-41

 ⁴⁰Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. ⁴¹Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.

[Elsie]

Don't they actually put tradition ABOVE written scripture?

I think an answer to your question can be found by searching FR for how they manage to slither out of a CLEAR COMMAND of Jesus: CAll no man father.

[Mark17]

See you in the 💭 bro.

[daniel1212]

The Holy Spirit "guides" papal conclaves, yes: Our Lord the Holy Spirit guides everyone who asks for His guidance. "Controls," in the sense of overriding direction, no. Any given Pope cannot be regarded as a personal Holy Spirit "pick," --- except in the sense of the general superintendence of Providence, present also in the outcomes of U.S. presidential elections,

You should state that this is an opinion.

With regard to those truths connected to revelation by historical necessity and which are to be held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed, the following examples can be given: the legitimacy of the election of the Supreme Pontiff or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, the canonizations of saints (dogmatic facts), the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations ...37

In context, two basic classes of teachings requiring assent are being dealt with:

The first paragraph [of the Professio fidei] states: "With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the Word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church, either by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed." The object taught in this paragraph is constituted by all those doctrines of divine and catholic faith which the Church proposes as divinely and formally revealed and, as such, as irreformable.

These doctrines require the assent of theological faith by all members of the faithful. Thus, whoever obstinately places them in doubt or denies them falls under the censure of heresy, as indicated by the respective canons of the Codes of Canon Law...

The second proposition of the Professio fidei states: "I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals."

The object taught by this formula includes all those teachings belonging to the dogmatic or moral area,13 which are necessary for faithfully keeping and expounding the deposit of faith, even if they have not been proposed by the Magisterium of the Church as formally revealed..

Such doctrines can be defined solemnly by the Roman Pontiff when he speaks 'ex cathedra' or by the College of Bishops gathered in council, or they can be taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Church as a "sententia definitive tenenda".14 Every believer, therefore, is required to give firm and definitive assent to these truths, based on faith in the Holy Spirit's assistance to the Church's Magisterium, and on the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium in these matters.15 Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine16 and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church.

The truths belonging to this second paragraph can be of various natures, thus giving different qualities to their relationship with revelation. There are truths which are necessarily connected with revelation by virtue of an historical relationship; while other truths evince a logical connection that expresses a stage in the maturation of understanding of revelation which the Church is called to undertake. - Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 29, 1998, the Solemnity of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul. + Joseph Card. Ratzinger Prefect; http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM

[af_vet_1981]

the Greek verb "harpadzo" meaning "to snatch away":

Is the snatching away present in, or absent from, this passage ?

I also notice that the Apostle to the Gentiles previously told (not wrote) them about "these things" when he was with them. I also read further down that he instructs them to hold the traditions they were taught by word or by epistle. The rapture is a modern teaching that was not part of the tradition of the one holy catholic apostolic church.

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

...

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

Second Thessalonians, Catholic chapter two, Protestant verses one to five,
Second Thessalonians, Catholic chapter two, Protestant verses fifteen to seventeen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[Elsie]

I know we are not supposed to cross threads, but the one THIS is in is now LOCKED.

What am I to do??

http://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3552706/replies?c=889

[Elsie]

I wish you quit posting what my chosen religion’s official officials have written about certain subjects.

It’s making us less learned Catholics look; well; foolish.

—Catholic_Wannbe_Dude(Hail Mary!!)

[Mark17]

Mark and Elsie are great Limerick writers
In addition, we are also very good fighters
Contending for souls
While heaping on coals
Cuz in Heaven, there won't be any blighters.

[MHGinTN]

I can relate to the Peter of Scripture. When one contemplates what that fisherman was tasked to accept, well I have degrees from Universities to help me reconstruct things in a logical fashion, but Peter was without those aides. Imagine, if you will, that you have striven your whole life to live by Mosaic dictates, even as a rough fisherman among other rough fishermen. Along comes Messiah, Whom you do not even recognize (who could, folks had been taught He would come as a King, not a servant to suffer our 'penalty' for us).

You see amazing miracles intermingled with crowd threats and 'righteous dudes' setting to stone your Messiah, only to have Him pass through them, unassailed!

You witness feeding thousands with the lunch pail of a child. You see Him walking on water and try to join Him, only to be overtaken by your natural doubts.

You see the authorities of Churcha nd state seize Him and hold a trial, proclaiming Him a fraud to be executed.

Then mysteriously, because you are not well versed in the Scriptures, He amazingly survives a Roman Crucifixion? Except He suddenly appears in a locked and shuttered room to show you HE did what He told folks He would do if they destroyed the Temple of His body!

Imagine what it must have left Peter pondering when THIS MESSIAH leaves into the clouds right before your astonished eyes, and yo uare left remembering HIS advice to wait for the Day of Pentecost.

You wait and lo and behold a miraculous things happen when you simply describe the events of the past several weeks, then things get chaotic in the capital city and the authorities throw you in prison, whip you, then let you go, then hound you into leaving Jerusalem for a friend's house.

You have a dream, but you awake to realize it was not a dream and people are at the front door downstairs, sent to find you by a Roman Centurion!

You go with the visitors and lo and behold a similar miraculous pouring out of GOD's Spirit happens while you're trying to relate the events of Messiah's FIRST visit to the planet! But these are GENTILES!

And that doesn't even address your failure to remain faithful during the arrest and trial and crucifixion of you Messiah ... you didn't even go to the execution to give HIM morale support, after denying HIM!

BUT God is the faithful and loving parent Who has Promised to raise you up in the way that you should go, so you are never tossed aside, despite your failures to grasp it all while living it!

Yeah, I can identify with the Peter of Scripture. Thanks be to GOD!