I cannot believe Easter Vigil is almost here. Easter Vigil, the night before Easter, is a special service where Non-Catholics are welcome into full communion with the Catholic Church. We have spent almost a year in study and prayer preparing for this once in a lifetime event.
I am very excited, and I ask that you would all pray for me, as well as the estimated 150,000 people in the US who are planning to join the Catholic Church this year.
This will probably be my last blog entry as a Non-Catholic. God bless you all, and thank you for being with me on this journey of faith. See you on the other side of the Tiber.
21 comments:
How do we determine whether a church is teaching correct doctrine or not? The only infallible standard that Scripture says that we have is the Bible (Isaiah 8:20; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; Isaiah 40:8; 1 Peter 2:25; Galatians 1:6-9). Tradition is a part of every church, and that tradition must be compared to God's Word, lest it go against what is true (Mark 7:1-13). It is true that the cults and sometimes orthodox churches twist the interpretation of Scripture to support their practices; nonetheless, Scripture, when taken in context and faithfully studied, is able to guide one to the truth.
The “first church” is the church that is recorded in the New Testament, especially in the Book of Acts and the Epistles of Paul. The New Testament church is the “original church” and the “one true church.” We can know this because it is described, in great detail, in Scripture. The church, as recorded in the New Testament, is God’s pattern and foundation for His church. On this basis, let’s examine the Roman Catholic claim that it is the “first church.” Nowhere in the New Testament will you find the “one true church” doing any of the following: praying to Mary, praying to the saints, venerating Mary, submitting to a pope, having a select priesthood, baptizing an infant, observing the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as sacraments, or passing on apostolic authority to successors of the apostles. All of these are core elements of the Roman Catholic faith. If most of the core elements of the Roman Catholic Church were not practiced by the New Testament Church (the first church and one true church), how then can the Roman Catholic Church be the first church? A study of the New Testament will clearly reveal that the Roman Catholic Church is not the same church as the church that is described in the New Testament.
The New Testament records the history of the church from approximately A.D. 30 to approximately A.D. 90. In the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries, history records several Roman Catholic doctrines and practices among early Christians. Is it not logical that the earliest Christians would be more likely to understand what the Apostles truly meant? Yes, it is logical, but there is one problem. Christians in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries were not the earliest Christians. Again, the New Testament records the doctrine and practice of the earliest Christians…and, the New Testament does not teach Roman Catholicism. What is the explanation for why the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th century church began to exhibit signs of Roman Catholicism?
The answer is simple – the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th century (and following) church did not have the complete New Testament. Churches had portions of the New Testament, but the New Testament (and the full Bible) were not commonly available until after the invention of the printing press in A.D. 1440. The early church did its best in passing on the teachings of the apostles through oral tradition, and through extremely limited availability to the Word in written form. At the same time, it is easy to see how false doctrine could creep into a church that only had access to the Book of Galatians, for example. It is very interesting to note that the Protestant Reformation followed very closely after the invention of the printing press and the translation of the Bible into the common languages of the people. Once people began to study the Bible for themselves, it became very clear how far the Roman Catholic Church had departed from the church that is described in the New Testament.
Scripture never mentions using "which church came first" as the basis for determining which is the "true" church. What it does teach is that one is to use Scripture as the determining factor as to which church is preaching the truth and thus is true to the first church. It is especially important to compare Scripture with a church's teaching on such core issues as the full deity and humanity of Christ, the atonement for sin through His blood on Calvary, salvation from sin by grace through faith, and the infallibility of the Scriptures. The “first church” and “one true church” is recorded in the New Testament. That is the church that all churches are to follow, emulate, and model themselves after.
Anonymous,
Wow!!! Your comment is great, and it is a good starting point for a lot of discussion.
You are going to have to be patient with me while I find the time in order to formulate a response that will do your post justice.
God bless..
Anonymous,
How do we determine whether a church is teaching correct doctrine or not? The only infallible standard that Scripture says that we have is the Bible (Isaiah 8:20; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; Isaiah 40:8; 1 Peter 2:25; Galatians 1:6-9).
Yes. Scripture is the Word of God. It is breathed by the Holy Spirit Himself. It is absolutely infallible.
Is the Bible the only infallible standard...hardly. Just think about it for a minute. In order for the Bible to be the only infallible authority, it has to tell us which books of the Bible is God breathed. This would be the only way that we know for sure that the all of the Books of the Bible are infallible? If the Bible does not tell us that Hebrews is a part of Scripture, then it cannot be.
Of course Hebrews is a part of Scripture, but in order to accept that, you and I must both accept that there is another source of infallible authority that actually declares it to be so.
Nowhere in the New Testament will you find the “one true church” doing any of the following: praying to Mary, praying to the saints, venerating Mary, submitting to a pope, having a select priesthood, baptizing an infant, observing the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as sacraments, or passing on apostolic authority to successors of the apostles.
I would beg to differ. I would say that everything that you mentioned above has a Biblical basis and foundation. If you would like to discuss any of the topics above, I would be more than happy to.
A study of the New Testament will clearly reveal that the Roman Catholic Church is not the same church as the church that is described in the New Testament.
Of course I disagree. A study of the New Testament will clearly reveal that the Roman Catholic Church is exactly the same Church described in the New Testament.
The answer is simple – the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th century (and following) church did not have the complete New Testament.
In other words, there was a time, when Christ's Church did not exist? There was a time between the Apostles and the establishment of the canon of the New Testament where the Holy Spirit actually left and the people were led into error?
That would mean that Christ was not serious when He said that He would send the Holy Spirit to lead the people into all truth (John 16:12-15). I cannot accept that. At one time, I did, but I cannot anymore.
The early church did its best in passing on the teachings of the apostles through oral tradition, and through extremely limited availability to the Word in written form.
How do you think that the Books of the Bible were actually selected? They were selected based on how well it lined up with the Tradition that was taught by the Apostles? The people who chose Romans to be a part of the New Testament and the Gospel of Thomas to not be included used the Tradition that they were taught by the Apostles in order to determine what should be included and what shouldn't.
It is very interesting to note that the Protestant Reformation followed very closely after the invention of the printing press and the translation of the Bible into the common languages of the people.
I think it is interesting to note that God would wait so long to inspire the creation of the printing press if He meant the Bible to be the foundation of His Church. If He really thought that His Church needed saving by the Protestant Reformation, why wait over 1400 years?
This of course leads me to believe that Christ was not joking or lying when He said that the Holy Spirit will lead the Church into all truth.
Once people began to study the Bible for themselves, it became very clear how far the Roman Catholic Church had departed from the church that is described in the New Testament.
Once people began to study scriptures for themselves, everyone became their own Pope. Everyone believes that they can interpret Scripture infallibly. This is why we have the Baptists, Pentecostals, Methodists, Anglican, Christian Reformed, Presbyterian...they all believe that they are interpreting Scripture correctly, yet they have some very contradicting beliefs and theologies. They cannot all be right.
Scripture never mentions using "which church came first" as the basis for determining which is the "true" church.
Correct.
What it does teach is that one is to use Scripture as the determining factor as to which church is preaching the truth and thus is true to the first church.
Really? Where does it say that exactly? Where does it say to use the Bible as the sole authority and the determining factor as to which is the true church?
The “first church” and “one true church” is recorded in the New Testament. That is the church that all churches are to follow, emulate, and model themselves after.
Why follow, emulate, and model after it when you can be a member of it? I would rather be a member of it, wouldn't you?
Anonymous,
I believe that your heart is in the right place. From your position, I am joining a Church that you don't believe to be established by God. You may even be trying to save me. Thanks for the gesture. Either way, please keep me in your prayers, and I will keep you in mine. Pray that I will find the Truth and fall more in love with it everyday, and I will do the same for you.
God bless...
Anonymous....
Typo...
Pray that I will find the Truth and fall more in love with Him everyday, and I will do the same for you.
Carlus,
I have been thinking of you and praying for you this week! I'm excited for you and your journey which is just beginning! God bless you!
Christa
Thanks Christa...
Your prayers have definitely been felt and appreciated....
Know that my wife and I have been praying for you as well....
God bless...
Hi Carlus! Something you said caught me here....are we really suppose to be in full communion with a "church"? or Christ? Once we are in full communion with a "church" body is that when we arrive as Christians? I'm not understanding that part of your entry....
Anonymous...
Full communion with the Church is definitely worth explaining...
Sometimes, you hear from Non-Catholics that they are converting to Catholicism. This is not theologically correct. You can't convert from one from of Christianity to another. You can only join a church, when moving from one Christian Denomination to another. You actually convert when you leave Christianity for another religion or come from another religion to Christianity.
Regarding the full communion with the Church vs full communion with Christ...this is saying exactly the same thing.
If the Catholic Church is truly Body of Christ, like I believe it is, then I am not only coming into full communion with the Church, I am also coming into full communion with Christ.
Hope that helps....
God bless...
Anonymous,
Once we are in full communion with a "church" body is that when we arrive as Christians?
Oops. I forgot to explain this part.
Every Christian denomination contains Christians. In essence, you could say that every Non-Catholic is, in a sense, seperated from the Catholic Church by varying degrees. The Orthodox Church, which split away circa 1000A.D. is closer than the Anglican Church which separated just prior to the Protestant Reformation. The Lutheran Church is separated to a lesser degree than the Calvinists which is separated to a lesser degree than the Methodists..and so on and so on.
We are all Christians. I don't believe that any of us will finally arrive on this side of Heaven. I do believe, however, that we can get closer to the fullness of the Truth left to us by Truth Himself and the Apostles.
God bless...
"Every Christian denomination contains Christians."
Agreed, and I'm not trying to be difficult =) But then why the need to "join" a particular one? The body is the body, it is no more or less of a body because of it's denomination...God sees us as equals, nothing we do can draw us closer to, nor push us away from Him.
Anonymous,
Agreed, and I'm not trying to be difficult =)
My apologies if I may have come off a little harsh. That is the problem with online communications. I may come off a little harsh when that is not my intent at all....
But then why the need to "join" a particular one? The body is the body, it is no more or less of a body because of it's denomination
I think that this would only matter if doctrine was not important. If it really didn't matter what Christians believed, so long as they believe in the core fundamentals (whatever that means), then one denomination is not better than any other.
Is doctrine important? Is it crucial to know and understand what Christ and the Apostles really taught? In my opinion it is. If we really believe that what we are taught came from God Himself, which part of it is negotiable? None of it. Therefore, one denomination that strays further and further away from what Christ taught cannot be as true as another denomination that has kept all of Christ's teachings.
God sees us as equals, nothing we do can draw us closer to, nor push us away from Him
In some ways we are equal, yes. But in others, we are not. We have the privilege of being called sons and daughters of God. We are all a part of the same family. We are all sinners and we are all in need of salvation. In this sense we are equal.
In another sense, we are not equal. God is forming us and disciplining us to be holy. He is preparing us to enter into Heaven. This is a journey and a process. The journey begins here on Earth. That is why we are called to forgive those who sin against us. This is because of the nature that God is trying to give us. He wants us to share in his divinity. Now before you think that I am blaspheming (1 Peter 2:14).
In a nutshell, what I am saying is that we are all called to be Saints. We are all called to be holy and perfect. This is accomplished through our journey here on Earth and reaches it final destination in Heaven. In this sense, we are not all equal
God bless....
"In another sense, we are not equal. God is forming us and disciplining us to be holy. He is preparing us to enter into Heaven."
The criteria for entrance into heaven is believing in the One sent by God as the Savioe fo His people.It is that genuine belief that moves someone from the ranks of the "condemned" (born on death row) to the ranks of the saved with a home in heaven.
We love to think we can to 'earn' salvation. Scripture however is clear.
I feel you have already been through all this and are joyfully stepping into the bondage of an unbiblical system of works-righteousness. I am afraid the Protestants do the same thing with their 'social gospel'.
Anonymous,
The criteria for entrance into heaven is believing in the One sent by God as the Savioe fo His people.
This is part of it, yes. Another part of it includes being made holy that which no one will see Christ. And lest you think that this is something without biblical foundation:
Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord(Hebrews 12:14
We love to think we can to 'earn' salvation. Scripture however is clear.
Who said anything about earning salvation? I don't believe you can earn salvation. It is a free gift. All you have to do is accept it and respond to it. It is not our works that make us holy, it is God working in us. How can this be our works?
Not only is Scripture clear on this, but also the Catholic Church. Remember, it is the one who fought against the heresy of Pelagianism and Semi-Pelgianism. The irony is that so many today will accuse the Catholic Church of a heresy that it proclaimed as a heresy.
I feel you have already been through all this and are joyfully stepping into the bondage of an unbiblical system of works-righteousness. I am afraid the Protestants do the same thing with their 'social gospel'.
Yes. I have been through this. I even held some of the same positions as you do. I don't mind going through it again. Remember the passage on my blog:
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,1 Peter 3:15
I don't consider myself stepping into bondage. Instead, I consider myself being set free from a false theological position that if carefully examined, has no merit of truth except for that which originates in it's Mother, the Bride of Christ, the Catholic Church.
God bless...
"I consider myself being set free from a false theological position that if carefully examined,"
What position and carefully examined according to what? The Catholic Church is the be all and end all? That's what you said and that sir, is blasphemy
Anonymous,
What position and carefully examined according to what?
Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.
The Catholic Church is the be all and end all? That's what you said and that sir, is blasphemyWhat do you mean that the Catholic Church is the be all and end all? What exactly did I say that made you believe that this is what I meant? And what do you think that I mean by it that would qualify it to be blasphemy?
"has no merit of truth except for that which originates in it's Mother, the Bride of Christ, the Catholic Church."
The only Sola Scriptura you seem to believe in is scripture as interpreted by the Catholic church.
Anonymous,
The only Sola Scriptura you seem to believe in is scripture as interpreted by the Catholic church.I am not sure that I understand this statement. Sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the only authoritative body in Christianity. The Catholic Church does not teach that at all. I don't believe that at all. And to be frank, The Bible doesn't teach that at all either.
Do I believe that anyone can read the Bible and come to know Jesus Christ...yes. I also believe that people can misinterpret what the Bible is really saying, due to lack of scholarship. Let's face it. It is a book written many years ago to a completely different culture. We cannot, and should not approach the Bible, with our 21st Century Americanized perspective. To really understand it, we have to understand the time, circumstances and the culture in which the Scriptures were written.
God bless..
It's in your own words, my friend:
"I consider myself being set free from a false theological position that if carefully examined, has no merit of truth except for that which originates in it's Mother, the Bride of Christ, the Catholic Church."
Anonymous,
What is in my own words? What specifically did I say that is blasphemous?
See the previous comment in which yuo were quoted. The words themselves indicate that you assert the Catholic Church is the arbiter of all truth. If your words mean what they say, they are blasphemous.
Anonymous,
The words themselves indicate that you assert the Catholic Church is the arbiter of all truth. If your words mean what they say, they are blasphemous.Okay. Now I understand the confusion. I believe that our Trinitarian Lord is the arbiter of all truth. I also believe that this same Lord is the one that is leading the Catholic Church.
Therefore, what I was trying to say that God leads the Catholic Church into all areas of truth.
God bless...
Post a Comment