Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

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

Posted on 05/22/2017 7:51:58 AM PDT by Salvation

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

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!


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; council; history; jerusalem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-305 next last
Video
1 posted on 05/22/2017 7:51:58 AM PDT by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; NYer; ELS; Pyro7480; livius; ArrogantBustard; Catholicguy; RobbyS; marshmallow; ...

Monsignor Pope Ping!


2 posted on 05/22/2017 7:53:12 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

excellent...now let’s wait for the Reinterpretation Train to arrive at the station, and bumble through some retelling of straight forward history to make it seem as little catholic as possible....


3 posted on 05/22/2017 8:06:46 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

I thought the article and the video were both excellent. I concur with your second thought. LOL!


4 posted on 05/22/2017 8:08:21 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Yes, I agree. This article was a bumbling re-arranging of straightforward history, turning the wider truth of the matters sideways, ending up almost entirely upside down on it's head --- when essentially, it's asserted the Latin Church (as it is now, and has been for say, the last 1200 years or so) is continuing epitome of the earliest ages of the Church.

I wouldn't much care, but I hate to see God's name (and the Holy Spirit) so casually dragged through the mud.

5 posted on 05/22/2017 8:30:50 AM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

Allllll Aboard !!!!!!!!


6 posted on 05/22/2017 8:32:18 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan; Salvation
Was this posted for discussion, or not? Your comment appears to indicate that you do not want a discussion, only affirmation from like-minded individuals. There is a Caucus label for that.

But now, if no non-Catholic replies to this post, then that is affirmation from silence. And if they do, it is just someone bumbling through the text. A nice inoculation from discussion, and a game that is rigged so that your point of view prevails either way.


7 posted on 05/22/2017 8:34:53 AM PDT by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

No thanks. I'll not join in with Charles Pope's cunning, and grievous errors.

I much prefer the real truth.

8 posted on 05/22/2017 8:35:37 AM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

protestants, they’re nothing if not predictable.


9 posted on 05/22/2017 8:36:22 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

no one is saying you cant discuss, i merely pointed out that as soon as history is recounted, and straight forward history of the early church’s catholicity, itz only a matter of time before protestants chime in with the usual hermeneutical nonsense that makes a sham out of church history...

reinterpret
revisionist history
etc etc

lather, rinse, repeat.


10 posted on 05/22/2017 8:38:19 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

yes, the ‘real truth’ as long as it denies a straight forward reading of history....

enjoy your fictionilized netflix version of ‘church history’

Tickets Please....


11 posted on 05/22/2017 8:40:06 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

In other words, your point of view is that the Roman schismatics from 1054 have the only correct view on how to understand this passage, and the Ship of Thebes that constitutes the current RCC is exactly the same as the first century church?


12 posted on 05/22/2017 8:42:41 AM PDT by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

im saying a plain reading of the text this article is about clearly shows the seminal catholicity of the early church, and that folks, like you and others, will always be counted on to come in and bring up some nonsense, such as this most recent reply.

does this article mention anything about 1054?


13 posted on 05/22/2017 8:44:49 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
No, I'm saying that the RCC has replaced a ruling body of elders with a supreme pontiff (which is one of the reasons the RCC split from the EO, where the Bishop of Rome was considered "first among equals"), have added and replaced doctrine over the years so that what is the RCC is nothing like what the first century church was.

If the Holy Spirit guides the RCC, does that mean the Pope Francis was put there by the Holy Spirit?

14 posted on 05/22/2017 8:49:36 AM PDT by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

reread what i said and what the article says, it is the SEMINAL church council.

Peter was the head of that council, despite fictionalized attempts to make it seem that he was just ‘one of the guys’ discussing things....

and down to today with the Pope being in charge of all councils, etc.

there has been no adding of doctrine that wasnt in, for a lack of repeating myself, seminal form in the early church.

there has been no change in doctrine, only a fuller understanding.

this sort of, again, hermeneutical nonsense, from protestants, is a greater problem than ever before.

The holy spirit has guided all those bishops down over the eons to pick the right man to lead the church, the holy spirit wouldnt be needed if the church just needed ‘another guy’ to hang out and discuss things with.


15 posted on 05/22/2017 8:54:44 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
The holy spirit has guided all those bishops down over the eons to pick the right man to lead the church

So, Pope Francis is the "right man to lead the church"?

16 posted on 05/22/2017 8:56:37 AM PDT by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

I just wanted people to know the truth. There is no caucus on it.


17 posted on 05/22/2017 8:59:06 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

yes, he was chosen. are you saying the infallible Holy Spirit has errored?


18 posted on 05/22/2017 8:59:48 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

Peter was the First Pope. Or this that not in your history book?


19 posted on 05/22/2017 9:01:51 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
yes, he was chosen. are you saying the infallible Holy Spirit has errored?

I don't accept that the Holy Spirit choses popes. And from what I have read on the RF and elsewher, it seems many Roman Catholics believe the current pope is the wrong man.

20 posted on 05/22/2017 9:06:15 AM PDT by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-305 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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