One true Church?

[Dorothy Mae]

I know of a few churches that believe that their church is the one true church, and all others are either less than they are or are flat out going to hell.

First of all, I am Catholic. My church believes this. Other churches are "separated"

I think the main difference between Catholic Churches and Protestant churches is Communion.

Catholic churches believe that it is literally him, produced in the Catholic only process of transubstantiation. But at the last supper he held it up, before he was sacrificed, and said,"this is my body"

Protestant churches believe that it is a memorial meal only, and a symbol. But Jesus said about the bread "this is my body"

What if it is him, symbolically and literally, and both are right, and both are wrong? That would mean that you will be judged on how much you loved others and showed mercy, no mater what rituals you did or church you belonged to.

New International Version
For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

New International Version
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

I do believe this. And I believe that the church with a small "c" catholic, is the universal church of all who believe in and love and follow Jesus. Peace

There are more differences between very catholic catholics and protestants, both historically and currently. But not very catholic catholics can be actually protestant in thought. There are also protestants whose thinking is more catholic than they suppose.

 

[WanderedHome]

I know of a few churches that believe that their church is the one true church, and all others are either less than they are or are flat out going to hell.

First of all, I am Catholic. My church believes this. Other churches are "separated"

I think the main difference between Catholic Churches and Protestant churches is Communion.

Catholic churches believe that it is literally him, produced in the Catholic only process of transubstantiation. But at the last supper he held it up, before he was sacrificed, and said,"this is my body"

I am Eastern Orthodox and we believe ourselves to be the True Church. We believe the Eucharist to be the real Body and Blood of Christ, but unlike other Eucharistic churches, we try to avoid being drawn into explaining how it is by human reasoning. It is a Mystery of the faith that cannot be explained. Attempting to do so can cause us to stumble into heresy. We might be able to say it is symbolic if we understand the original meaning of the Greek word does not mean "not real". This is a common misunderstanding among Protestants and Catholics.

On the True Church: we have a saying- "we know where the Holy Spirit is, but we don't know where He isn't." To say we are the True Church only speaks to what we believe about ourselves, not about other churches. "True" is not understood as "True/False, A or B", but it is understood as "Surest, most reliable way." Other Christians try to follow Christ, let Him judge them. We must only stay faithful to the Tradition we've been handed.

 

[mikeangel]

I am Eastern Orthodox and we believe ourselves to be the True Church. We believe the Eucharist to be the real Body and Blood of Christ, but unlike other Eucharistic churches, we try to avoid being drawn into explaining how it is by human reasoning. It is a Mystery of the faith that cannot be explained. Attempting to do so can cause us to stumble into heresy. We might be able to say it is symbolic if we understand the original meaning of the Greek word does not mean "not real". This is a common misunderstanding among Protestants and Catholics.

On the True Church: we have a saying- "we know where the Holy Spirit is, but we don't know where He isn't." To say we are the True Church only speaks to what we believe about ourselves, not about other churches. "True" is not understood as "True/False, A or B", but it is understood as "Surest, most reliable way." Other Christians try to follow Christ, let Him judge them. We must only stay faithful to the Tradition we've been handed.

Thanks to you and all who responded.

I stand informed, that not all Protestant churches are on the same page as far as "the real presence" of Christ in the communion goes. And I agree with the gist of those who stated that belief in Christ and love of others is what matters, and what one believes about Communion is personal but not required for salvation.

My differences with the Catholic (big C) church are more than just Communion and transubstantiation. And in many Papal bulls, it is declared that we are true and others are "separated". I was just starting there.

Someone said that I should just become Protestant because I believe what I stated. Well, according to the Catholic church. Salvation is possible to our "separated brothers", and even other faiths than Christianity, and says that they are "gravely deficient", but as far as I go, being Catholic, that unless I am insane, if I leave, Salvaton is not possible. That means you can theoretically be a Muslim, believing that Christ did not rise from the dead and "Allah has no sons", or a JW believing it is wrong to worship Jesus because he is the Archangel Michael not God incarnate, just a messenger. And you can make it. But if I read the Bible cover to cover and find many things that my church does that are not only not in scripture, but things they do that go against scripture, If I leave and join another church, or just perform social ministry (homeless outreach, visiting hospitals and nursing homes, prison ministry etc. etc.) I am lost. Salvation for me is not possible. I resent that. I'm still here though, I just do not participate in anything I do not find in scripture and agree with. And I am begging God to straighten this mess out. I think you can go to mass every day, confession once a week, be in the K of C, give lots of $, and be as clueless as a doornail as to what Jesus really wants from someone, which is mercy to others IMHO. Again thanks to all who responded to this. Gotta go to work. Peace and love to all

 

[thecolorsblend]

I know of a few churches that believe that their church is the one true church, and all others are either less than they are or are flat out going to hell.

First of all, I am Catholic. My church believes this. Other churches are "separated"

I think the main difference between Catholic Churches and Protestant churches is Communion.

Catholic churches believe that it is literally him, produced in the Catholic only process of transubstantiation. But at the last supper he held it up, before he was sacrificed, and said,"this is my body"

Protestant churches believe that it is a memorial meal only, and a symbol. But Jesus said about the bread "this is my body"

What if it is him, symbolically and literally, and both are right, and both are wrong? That would mean that you will be judged on how much you loved others and showed mercy, no mater what rituals you did or church you belonged to.

The realization I had was that Catholics and Protestants really don't disagree on very much. Protestants believe in certain things. The issue is that Catholics generally believe in those things to a larger degree.

 

[Albion]

Truthfully, I was thinking about that very subject just the other day.

My conclusion was that Catholics do agree with Protestants (or the historical churches among the Protestants), quite as you said, but that the issue is that Catholics have embellished, tampered with, those things. By adding pious speculation to the Gospel truths, however well-intentioned that might be, the result isn't belief "to a larger degree" but belief in something that's been diluted or abased.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The main difference between the Catholic Church and Protestant church movements is the idea of salvation through works vs salvation through grace alone.
A Catholic believes that a Protestant has no incentive to stop sinning because they believe that forgiveness is absolute and once saved always saved. To a degree, some people do believe this and aren't truly repentant. The protestant defense is that you don't stop sinning and start doing good works out of reward incentive or avoiding punishment, but out of a desire to love God and show Him you love Him through how you live your life.
A Protestant believes that the Caholic way, seeking to "earn" your way into salvation through good works, tithing, communion and so on, is arrogant, that you stop depending on God because you are trying to do it yourself. To a Protestant there's nothing we can personally do to save ourselves except put ourselves in God's hands and trust Him. A less thought about aspect of this is such things as plenary indulgences, that a MAN can forgive you for sins against GOD and that God will honor this. It gives men too much power in it all.

Ultimately there is scripture supporting each viewpoint, and we really don't know which interpretation is correct, but I believe that both viewpoints can come to the same profitable outcome if there's faith and dependence on God in both, and in both viewpoints you should do good works, but the movitvations may differ.

The problem here is that in [Roman] Catholic theology one does not believe in earning their way into salvation through their own efforts. This has largely been a straw-man that some Protestants use, but does not reflect actual Catholic teaching. No Catholic, well versed in the theology of their church, would believe they can earn their salvation by their works. Rather the key to understanding Catholic theology is cooperation.

Salvation is a process that begins with God's grace and extends into the life of a believer by cooperating with God's grace, by not resisting it, and by God's grace infusing the believer--through faith and obedience to God's will. Thus justification and sanctification are processes in which the believer, empowered by the Spirit, infused with the grace which God alone gives, is transformed and worked upon.

This is at odds with Historic Protestant theology (e.g. Lutheran and Reformed) which states that salvation is monergistic rather than synergistic; and that grace rather than being a created energy (c.f. the Energies-Essence dispute between Barlaam of Calabria and Gregory Palamas) which God infuses in the believer to cooperate with God toward righteousness is, itself, the imputed alien righteousness of Jesus Christ which is ours solely by God's gracious act, by what Christ has done alone, given to us as pure gift, apart from ourselves, through the Means of Grace (Word and Sacrament). And that, therefore, the human will does not cooperate with grace in order to accomplish our salvation, but rather our salvation is accomplished by the sole work of God alone, objectively in Christ once and for all, and now given to us individually as pure grace through Word and Sacrament, creating faith in us--and that we are therefore justified, made righteous, by the imputed righteousness of Jesus given to us as pure gift.

But the doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith on Christ's account alone, while remaining the hallmark of the Historic Protestant churches, has largely been lost, and in some cases plainly rejected, by much of the modern Protestant world. We can thank 19th century American Revivalism and various Pietistic movements for a lot of this.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[WanderedHome]

Pretty much how the Roman Catholics threw the Orthodox Churches under the bus when Rome did it's "Power Grab" and became the FIRST PROTESTANTS, back in 1054

The Catholics didn't really throw the Orthodox under the bus, though Rome did attempt a power grab. The Orthodox Church continues strong to this day despite many attempts by the Godless powers of this world to destroy it. Just as Christ our God was truly visible and in the flesh, so His Church is also visible.

would make Catholics "Cannibals" for consuming human flesh, and also consuming BLOOD against God's commandment (Gen 9:4)

Did you know the early Christians were accused of cannibalism by the Roman pagans? Why would anyone think that if the Christians believed and taught that it was simply bread and wine? Even the immediate disciples of the Apostles- disciples who probably even knew Jesus Himself- wrote about it being the Body and Blood of Christ, as a bloodless sacrifice. It still looks and tastes like bread and wine, but it is the real Body and Blood of Christ, mystically. The Church has been firmly united in this belief ever since. Only after the Catholic Church lost its connection to the Orthodox faith, did this issue begin to be challenged by Protestants.

JESUS HIMSELF said that it was a "Memorial" that was "IN REMEMBERANCE of Him" (Luke 22:19,20). Should we believe "Catholic tradition", or the words of JESUS??

You should believe the Tradition that interprets the Scriptures correctly. If what you are understanding doesn't match up with 2,000 years of wisdom of the whole of the Church Fathers, you should probably try to come to a different understanding. Everyone should read the Bible, but keep in mind that the Bible we are holding in our hands would not exist if it wasn't for the Tradition of the Orthodox Church.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

What if it is him, symbolically and literally, and both are right, and both are wrong? That would mean that you will be judged on how much you loved others and showed mercy, no mater what rituals you did or church you belonged to.

"That will mean....." ?? Where did you get that?
I think that Everyone will be judged for every word, for every act, for every deed, for every thought ...
and "both" as if that is all there is ? Within(or among or in the midst of the people) one assembly in the New Testament, there were already many antichrists, so in any meeting there may be "both" the righteous and the unrighteous, right ?

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Many people see it your way. Nevertheless, that is the Roman Catholic view of the sacrament--Transubstantiation (change over of substance).


They aren't mutually exclusive. And they also aren't mutually exclusive in any of the other churches that think the sacrament of the altar is more than just symbolism. Lutheran, Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, etc.

It is completely sensible to see the elements as having been changed...and that the taking of them by the people is a memorial. In fact, it makes the act more meaningful, more special as a memorial, IF the bread and wine are more than a mere symbol.

BUt what's generally MISSED is that the "Body" and "Blood" of Christ which is to be "discerned" - is the Congregation of Born Again Christians gathered (the CHURCH), and THEY are the ones to be celebrated IN Christ.

Those who are "Weak", and those who "Die", do so because they're not "Discerned", and "Ministered to" by the Body of Christ - US.

 

[Albion]

BUt what's generally MISSED is that the "Body" and "Blood" of Christ which is to be "discerned" - is the Congregation of Born Again Christians gathered (the CHURCH), and THEY are the ones to be celebrated IN Christ.

Those who are "Weak", and those who "Die", do so because they're not "Discerned", and "Ministered to" by the Body of Christ - US.

Hi, Bob.

I wouldn't say it's been generally "missed." Rather, it's not accepted as a correct POV.

It's not the Roman Catholic understanding of the sacrament or that of any of the other denominations mentioned in that post.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

It's not the Roman Catholic understanding of the sacrament or that of any of the other denominations mentioned in that post.

Which, of course, doesn't mean that it's not true. in the Roman Catholic case, all you really have is "Tradition".

 

[thecolorsblend]

"This is my body."
- Ah yes, it's a symbol.
"No, this is my body."
- So it's a metaphor?
"Again, this is MY BODY!"
- It's just plain bread, got it!

 

[Bob Carabbio]

You should believe the Tradition that interprets the Scriptures correctly.

Which is exactly what I do. The BIBLE, with the promised Wisdom of the HOLY SPIRIT (James 1:5) is exactly how it's done.

 

[Albion]

Which, of course, doesn't mean that it's not true.

Of course not. A person could insist that the bread and wine turn into Fritos and Coca-Cola upon the priest's pronunciation of Christ's words...and that wouldn't mean it's not true. What I was saying was just that your own theory about this is not held by very many Christians.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

What I was saying was just that your own theory about this is not held by very many Christians.

I agree. But I'll stick with what I wrote regardless. It was a rather wide spread understanding among Charismatics (including Roman Catholics) back in the '70s.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Those who are "Weak", and those who "Die", do so because they're not "Discerned", and "Ministered to" by the Body of Christ - US.

This happens daily... the members are called the body of Christ, they are not called the blood though. Not recognizing the body is most common - both in Spirit, as Jesus says His Words are Spirit and they are Life,
and in the assembly - the living stones joined together ... even begrudging help given to the poor or needy or weak or sick....

 

[dzheremi]

Resident Oriental Orthodox ("Non-Chalcedonian", if you must) checking in, as I see the Eastern Orthodox have already been (I wasn't sure if non-Catholic/non-Protestant views were welcome until I saw that, since this is "Denomination Specific Theology").

We also teach that we are the one true Church, but in the sense of having kept the Orthodox faith (read: it's not like our Lord Jesus Christ established the Coptic Orthodox Church in particular, as He did not preach in Egypt that we know of, but this is that Church in Egypt, Libya, etc.). I wouldn't necessarily echo all what our EO friend has said, but there is a sense in which we agree with and can say that we know where the Holy Spirit is, but not where He is not. It is more common at least in the modern day to say that the Chalcedonians are fellow Christians, just not with us because of doctrinal disagreement that we have by and large worked out theologically (via the OO-EO dialogues), but have stalled in working out practically.

And Catholics and Protestants are largely considered similarly (i.e., same as any other Chalcedonians, since that's what Protestants are, having inherited that from their mother Rome), albeit more 'modern' and hence with more differences. We actually once had a entire Lutheran family visit us at my parish in Albuquerque, NM, and I don't think I ever had a more awkward Agpeya meal after the liturgy than that one. The vast difference in theology and accompanying mindset was really hard to miss, to the point where even one of my friends (an Egyptian) said to me afterwards "Who talks like that? Those were some weird people." It isn't really attributable to culture, as I was certainly more culturally akin to the our Lutheran visitors (I'm not Scandinavian or whatever, but I mean that in the sense of being non-Egyptian, 'White' Americans), but I was still just as mystified as anyone else as the wife of the family keep babbling on about her experiences with stigmata (unknown in Orthodoxy), visitations by angels, etc. I remembered from my own time in Catholicism before discovering Orthodoxy that some Catholics -- 'Charismatic Catholics', I take it -- that some Catholics talked like this, but I always thought those people were weird, too. Many strains of Western Christianity, broadly speaking, tend to encourage these kinds of ecstasies, whereas in Orthodoxy (and in the Coptic tradition more specifically, being so heavily rooted in monasticism) they are cause for concern about demonic influence/attack if they are indulged. (This is probably why things like stigmata never manifested among the Desert Fathers or others.)

Roman Catholics and Protestants definitely need to sort out historical and doctrinal grievances among each other, for their own sakes, but approaching Orthodoxy would be something different. We're not the one true Church because you aren't, but because the faith has been preserved among our fathers and handed down to us to this day with great sobriety, clarity, mystery, stamina, and the instruction and protection of the Holy Spirit, Who is God.

From the Agpeya (Coptic Horologion/book of daily prayer), Prime hour:

THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH

One is God the Father of everyone.

One is His Son, Jesus Christ the Word, Who took flesh and died; and rose from the dead on the third day, and raised us with Him.

One is the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, one in His Hypostasis, proceeding from the Father, purifying the whole creation, and teaching us to worship the Holy Trinity, one in divinity and one in essence. We praise Him and bless Him forever. Amen.

 

[charsan]

"This is my body."
- Ah yes, it's a symbol.
"No, this is my body."
- So it's a metaphor?
"Again, this is MY BODY!"
- It's just plain bread, got it!

Some just always must profane and minimize what Christ said and did.

 

[concretecamper]

"This is my body."
- Ah yes, it's a symbol.
"No, this is my body."
- So it's a metaphor?
"Again, this is MY BODY!"
- It's just plain bread, got it!

It IS really that simple.

Sadly, by adding pious speculation to the Gospel truths, protestants however well-intentioned that they might be, believe in something that's been diluted or abased.

 

[thecolorsblend]

But if I were me

Golly...