Most reliable method of preserving doctrine?

[Ortho_Cat]

You might simply have said that the 2 groups were apostolic churches and non-apostolic churches.

You add nothing to the distinction other than bring us the possibility of several groups of non-apostolic churches, some of which meet a definition of embracing sola scriptura (however defined) and those who do not.

Ya, I guess. But there would be alot of people arguing that their church is "apostolic" even though they don't have apostolic origin.

SS was claimed to be the norm by which we evaluate and establish doctrine, so I wanted to see how that compared to those who profess AS.

I know that some Anglicans profess SS as well, so they could be put on either list in reality.

 

[MrPolo]

I also maintain the Catholic doctrinal agreement isn't as tight as either the Protestant confessional churches or the Orthodox. In fact in the current situation, unity is maintain largely because people who disagree with the pope simply roll their eyes, but continue actings as if they were perfectly good Catholics.

In Acts 15, genuine elders had differing opinions on whether or not Gentiles should be circumcised. It doesn't mean Christ's Church was disunited on doctrine in the first century. Today, the Catholic Church teaches that anyone who rejects a defined matter of faith or morals is automatically excommunicated (a latae sententiae excommunication, cf. Canon Law 1364). This echoes Paul's statement that anyone who teaches "another gospel" should be "accursed"---which is the language of anathema (Gal. 1:8-9). Such a person is disunited from the Church that is united in doctrine.

In Catholicism, the teaching body, as in apostolic times, is identifiable. So in order to compare apples to apples, you would have to find the Magisterium contradicting itself on a defined issue of faith or morals. A dissenter "rolling his eyes" is not tantamount to disunity in the Church's doctrines any more than an infiltrator in Paul's time would be.

As to the OP's question of whether or not the Apostolic Churches are more united in doctrine than the world of sola scriptura-----it is not even a serious discussion because numerous teachings within the SS world contradict.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

 

[hedrick]

In Catholicism, the teaching body, as in apostolic times, is identifiable. So in order to compare apples to apples, you would have to find the Magisterium contradicting itself on a defined issue of faith or morals. A dissenter "rolling his eyes" is not tantamount to disunity in the Church's doctrines any more than an infiltrator in Paul's time would be.

I was responding to claims that the Catholic Church had a superior way to maintain unity. The fact that some of the unity is unacceptable to you doesn't change the fact that it exists. The Catholic Church does have variations within it as serious as, although different than, the variations among Protestants. Some of them are because not all Catholics care that they disagree with the magisterium. Others are because some of the variation is on issues that aren't defined dogmas.

The examples I gave, Liquori, Catholic charismatics and Catholic feminists, involve some variations that are acceptable under Catholic doctrinal standards and some that are not. Both kinds of variation, however, are typical of those among Protestant denominations. Catholics have handled groups with specific emphases through religious orders that have their own traditions, or other internal organizations and movements, some officially acceptable and some not. Among Protestants the equivalent is often different denominations. Because of our difference in ecclesiology, the existence of different denominations is not equivalent to what a split in the Catholic Church would be for you.

The point I'm trying to make is that there are certainly differences in how we handle differences, I'd rather explore them calmly than use them for debating points.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

In Acts 15.....

The Apostles, Elders and others used Sola Scriptura. Read the text, it's all there.



.

 

[Montalban]

Both (though mostly the later)

then it doesn't quite matter.

That's like calling someone like me (a Scot) "Asian" if I was born in Hong Kong.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I was responding to claims that the Catholic Church had a superior way to maintain unity.

... and did an EXCELLENT job of it!



I don't want to divert at all (you put it all well), but I might add (if I may) that displacing the issue of truth with the requirement of "quiet, docilic, submission to self as unto God" CAN create "unity" in submission but it's simply irrelevant to the issue of truth - as any study of the cults should make clear (did for me, anyway).





.

 

[sunlover1]

So I shouldn't tell you how it ends?

Doesn't it end the same way all of the GT threads end?

I think that simply points to the problem these discussions always raise - how then do you know what is the truth?

Pray about it and check Scripture.
God leads us if we let Him.

 

[Dorothea]

Dear sister, the reason i used the deutero's canonized by the RCC is because all of the mentioned groups agree on those. The Orthodox deutero list contain a few more than all of the rest agree on. I tried to find all of the deutero's that everyone shares, and that happens to be the list the the RCC has. Does that make sense?

I believe so. Thanks.

 

[Montalban]

The Apostles, Elders and others used Sola Scriptura. .

No they didn't. James bases his decision on what was said by Peter, Paul, and Scripture.

If Scripture alone were clear then they'd not have the problem

 

[Dorothea]

Why would they be major? Certainly you can see that prior councils have creedally attacked specific factions of the Orthodox communions ortho_cat says the church hopes to reunite.

The fact that even by the Fourth Century, some people could attribute delay in baptism to Constantine would pretty-much demand that such variations exist in the church catholic.

That would mean you had major divisions as late as the fourth century ...?

Um, even today I can find exemplars of people praying to Mary and meaning something entirely different -- in the Orthodox tradition. For instance, prayer for salvation through Mary's child, that seems to be argued.

So, ah, what's the Apostolic tradition preserved when the permissible statements seem to have varian motives? It doesn't sound like it's being preserved -- rather, it seems like it's shifting. When pre-Nicene fathers didn't say such things, what's the tradition preserving, again?

From what I've learned, there are different uses for the word "saved" in the Bible. It doesn't always mean salvation in the sense of what Christ did on the Cross, which we would say was Redemption, and salvation is the realization of what Christ did on the Cross. There are passages in the Bible that talk about one saving another, and obviously it doesn't mean this person is Christ and can save in this manner. When that is said in our hymns, it is asking her to pray to her Son for the salvation of our souls.

 

[sunlover1]

I posted this on the other thread, but I changed my mind and decided the topic deserves its own thread. So what is the most accurate/reliable/trustworthy method of preserving doctrine based on similarity of beliefs; Apostolic Succession or Sola Scriptura? I have posted the case for AS below, I would appreciate it if someone else could post the case for SS eventually.

You mean post the case for groups that use SS and have similar beliefs ...
Not to rain on your parade but .. what for?
If I found 25 sects who have 50 similar beliefs what would that prove to you?

I would be interested to see a similar list for Protestants so we can compare it to the list I made. Keep in mind that Protestantism is pretty much confined to the West (or at least they were originally) and only have 500 years to account for, while the Apostolic Churches comprise both East and West, and account for 2000 years. Would anyone be up to the task?

I don't think your experiment is going to work.... too many apples and oranges I'm thinking.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

No they didn't. James bases his decision on what was said by Peter, Paul, and Scripture.

If Scripture alone were clear then they'd not have the problem

If someone can pull the decision at the council of Jerusalem from the verse they used, I would give them a shiny nickel.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

You mean post the case for groups that use SS and have similar beliefs ...
Not to rain on your parade but .. what for?
If I found 25 sects who have 50 similar beliefs what would that prove to you?

I don't think your experiment is going to work.... too many apples and oranges I'm thinking.

What do you think the reason for this is? Why are there apples and oranges if everyone if using the same source?

 

[Montalban]

Doesn't it end the same way all of the GT threads end?

Wait till the sequel

 

[Montalban]

What do you think the reason for this is? Why are there apples and oranges if everyone if using the same source?

Can you really have orange sauce?

 

[Ortho_Cat]

No they didn't. James bases his decision on what was said by Peter, Paul, and Scripture.

If Scripture alone were clear then they'd not have the problem

Yes, if the decision is clear from scripture, why did Paul have to go and consult with the others? The fact is, you cannot pull the decision from Acts explicitly from that verse of scripture. It simply isn't there. The scripture was cited to show that that God desires the salvation of all men. In fact, if you go through the entire OT, nowhere in there does it make a provision for a convert to the faith not to be circumcised. Why would it? A convert to Judaism in the OT would have always gotten circumcised.

The apostles came to a decision under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and used scripture to support their decision, as has been done in later councils as well.

 

[sunlover1]

What do you think the reason for this is? Why are there apples and oranges if everyone if using the same source?

Same thing different day LOL
What do we know?
We know that God isn't the variable.
We know that Scripture isn't the variable.
I always come back to the humanoids, yourself?

Wait till the sequel

Cant wait!
Unless it involves pug plugs.

 

[Tim Myers]

Wasn't the word "protestant" originally coined by the Roman Catholic Church??

If so, why do non-Catholics still refer to themselves as "Protestants" and what are they still protesting??.....

 

[Montalban]

Wasn't the word "protestant" originally coined by the Roman Catholic Church??

If so, why do non-Catholics still refer to themselves as "Protestants" and what are they still protesting??.....

When the Catholic Church split from us they were happy calling themselves "Catholic" rather than Protestant