Mike S. (A Christian),
I'll tell you where I think you have gone wrong. ... To begin with, just because the "Orthodox" church and the "Roman Catholic" church can trace their histories back to the time of the apostles does not prove that either of these religious organizations is the same religious organization that was established by the apostles. Neither does it prove that either of these religious organizations would be approved of by the apostles, if the apostles were alive today.
Why do people feel that they need to tell me where I went wrong? This posting was initiated to answer a simple question as to why I reconciled with the Catholic Church. Your claim as to what the apostles would do, or that the Church is all that much different today, has no basis in fact. You have no way of knowing what the Apostles would or would not do. I myself never claimed anything about what the Apostles would approve of today.
For instance, the Watchtower Society, as it exists today, can certainly trace its history back to the Watchtower Society that was established many years ago by Charles Russell. But is there any doubt that if Charles Russell was alive today that he would not even recognize today's Watchtower Society as being the same religious organization that he founded? And is there any doubt that if Charles Russell was alive today that he would view today's Watchtower Society as being an unholy perversion of the religious organization that he established?
There is no comparison between the Catholic Church and the Watchtower Society. The Watchtower Society started out as a publishing business, and today it is a fraud masking as a religion. It is barely 120 years old compared to nearly 2,000 years of Catholic history. You nor I can say what Chuck Russell would do today ... I could as easily say that he would marvel at the growth, money, and power of the Society. Regardless, it is the Church-Business that Chuck built, and not the Church that Christ built.
As you know, Christ prophesied that after He left this earth Satan would sew seeds of corruption throughout His church. (Matt. 13) And as you also know, the apostle Paul prophesied that after the apostles died, "Savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock." In fact, Paul said that the truly Christian religious order that he and his fellow apostles had worked so hard to establish would very soon become corrupted. For he told his contemporaries, "Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. " (Acts 20:29,30) ... There is little doubt that Paul was referring to a coming corruption of organized Christianity in 2 Thess. chapter 2. There he said that a "lawless" "apostacy" was "already at work" within the true Christian religious order which the apostles had established. That being the case, the fact that a modern day church organization can trace its origins back to the days of the apostles does nothing to prove that it is now an uncorrupted continuation of the truly Christian religious order established by the apostles, for true Christian doctrines, traditions, and practices were already beginning to be corrupted during the lives of the apostles.
The Lord Jesus Christ promised that he would be with His Church all days unto the end of the world, and that the Gates of Hell would not prevail over it. Jesus said that after he left, the Holy Spirit would come to teach, comfort and guide his followers. Thus, while apostasy would be around, the Church would continue to fight it and withstand the assult. The writings of the early Church Fathers make it plain that they were indeed fighting heresy. So, while you are correct in one part, you have not consider the promise by Jesus and what history actually proves. Did Jesus lie or tell the truth? Did the Holy Spirit fall down on the job so badly that by the 15th through the 20th centuries, humans would have to figure out a way to rescue it? Can the Holy Spirit fail?
Many of the teachings, practices, and traditions of the religious organizations which you seem to now be recommending to us here differ so greatly from the teachings of Christ and His apostles that I find it hard to believe that any well informed person of sound mind can believe that such an organization might now constitute "Christ's true church." ( I hope it's not necessary to actually innumerate all of these here for you. Many of the Roman Catholic Church's false teachings were discussed at length not too long ago on Channel C.)
I have recommend nothing, so I cannot "seem" to be recommending anything. I posted an answer to a question I commonly get. I clearly stated at the outset that I am not preaching and that those days are over.
The difference is created in the minds of those who want a difference to exist ... it is called your interpretation and opinion. So the effort to employ intellectual intimidation and ad hominem to say that you are surprised that "any well informed person of sound mind can believe such" is a false argument. Anyone could reverse the same irrelevant argument on the position you put forth and say that about being a non-Catholic. It is a non-argument with no substance.
As for Channel C, the open hositlity and refusal to have civil an fair discussion on that topic led to many be removed from the board under accusation that they were trying to convert people to Catholicism. The open bias and hissy fits by leading members served to shut down open and fair discussion on that topic. Further, the board owner does not want Catholicism discussed on her board. So, I hardly consider anything discussed on Channel C as being definitive and absolute.
... Catholic church is now nor was ever Christ's true church after reading Paul's prophecy in 1 Timothy 4 is beyond me. There Paul wrote, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.They will forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods." In my opinion, only the spiritually blind can fail to see this prophecy for what it was.
I never stated that the RCC is the only true Church. Rather the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church are the historic Church. These are historical facts. I merely reconciled with it. I stated clearly, in both parts of this thread, that Christians exist in all denominations. The Catholic Church itself recognizes this fact. I find it curious that when a person says that they have reconciled with the Church, that now the concern with the “True” Church comes out. Why? I never suggested such a thing. Me thinks thou does protest too much.
I do not agree with all of what Rome teaches. So what? What Catholic does agree with everything? As for married Priests, Orthodox Priests can be married, and at one time so could Roman Priests. They are not forbidden to be married. Married men just cannot become priests in the Catholic Church unless they are converting over from the Orthodox or Angelican Churches. What the Apostle Paul was talking about was forbidding marriage altogether. As for abstaining from certain foods, Catholics can eat anything they want. They often do abstain from some foods on certain days as an act of commemorating a spiritual event. So what? This nonsense arguement came right from the Watchtower Society. Yet it is the Society that forbids the eating of certain foods, like birthday cake, meats with blood in them, etc. Why do you employ old and tired Watchtower arguements that are not factual? The Apostle Paul was not talking about abstaining from certain foods on certain days, but rather the prohibition of those things that a Christian could eat in good conscience.
Christians who for some reason find it necessary to identify some obviously highly corrupted church organization as "Christ's true church" and bow to their "Holy Fathers" remind me of the Israelites who insisted that they be given a visible human king. (1 Sam. 8) For some reason they found themselves unable to serve only the invisible King of Heaven, aided by His words found in the scriptures He had given them. Unlike those Israelites, the invisible King of Heaven, Jesus Christ, is the only king I need. Since leaving the JWs and becoming a Christian I have attended several churches. None of them has been anywhere near perfect. But by doing so I have been able to help my fellow Christians and they have been able to help me. In other words, I have been able to act as part of Christ's body, which has always been His only "true church."
Your opening sentence is a shear red herring. Christians do not find it necessary to identify a highly corrupted organization as Christ's true church. How obsurd! I certainly do not look for such a thing. Jesus Christ himself is the "truth" the "Way" and the "Life." I have merely decided to associate with the Catholic Church because of its moderate views, its historic connection to the early Church, and its focus on love and ministering to others. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches have carried forward the early traditions handed down by the Apostles, and they have a continued line of authority. The Church is not a "king" as you imply. You are correct, only Jesus Christ is the King. As a CAtholic I too am part of Christ's body and I pointed out that Christians in other denominations do so was well. Where is the argument?
Further, your opening sentence in the above paragraph is not intellectually honest. I do not bow to any Holy Father as any substitute for Christ or need for a visible King. I have never bowed to the Pope in my life. I respct his position as Bishop of the historic Holy See of Rome. My faith is in Christ alone. As Pope John Paul II once stated, "It is all about Jesus Christ." That is all I need. I do not need to argue with you about how wrong your Church is ... I don't care. If you believe in Jesus and find a hill top to pray, that is fine ... and if I ever see you there, I will stop and pray with you. But I will not shun and disdain my fellow Catholic and Orthodox and various Protestants simply because they meet in a defined denomination.
Jim, over the years I have followed your spiritual odyssey. I am now left wondering how it is that you now find yourself where you are. Maybe it is a result of your willingness to depart from the simple teachings of Christ. This is evidenced by your now praying to the Holy Spirit, while Christ instructed His followers to "Pray this way... our Father." For Christians to pray to Christ is understandable, since the Bible tells us that Christians would recognize Christ as their Father and call Him by that name. (Isa. 9:6) But prayer to the Holy Spirit was not taught by Christ or His apostles. Of course, neither was praying to long dead Catholic "Saints." I don't know if you are doing that yet. But if you are now looking to the Roman Catholic church for spiritual guidance you will probably be doing so soon.
Depart from the teachings of Christ? Surely you are kidding! This really comes across as pompous arrogance ... so in effect you are saying that you have te knowledge, the right, the authority and the right understanding of the scriptures, and anyone who dares reconcile with the Catholic Church is leaving the teachings of Christ ... because Mike S. says so. So, in effect, you raise yourself up a king to determine the conscience of other Christians, in this case Roman Catholics. I make no such judgments of any Christian. If I disagree with them, I do not accuse them of leaving Christ. There are Christians among the JWs.
Additionally, I do not pray to saints, but I do not judge those that do. However, this practice dates back to the very early Church and various forms of the Apostles Creed. So, it is hardly without precedant, and there is a logical basis for so doing ... maybe this deserves a post of its own.
As for prayer to the Holy Spirit, this calls for a separate posting because of ignorance and misunderstanding that this issue has generated. It is too much to deal with in this already long response to a long comment. There is a basis for praying to the Holy Spirit, which my new posting will detail. Jesus model prayer is one model. However, Jesus never once stated that we could "pray" to him. By doing so, you now have a dual God of a Father and a Son ... you believe in a Duality and not a Trinity ... wow! a distinction without a difference. Come on! We pray to Jesus because of the inferences and interpretations we draw from scripture and tradition. Likewise, there are inferences that suggest prayer to the Holy Spirit is acceptable and even necessary. As I said, I will start a new post on this topic, perhaps by tomorrow.
I can only suggest that you begin sticking closely to the teaching of Christ and His apostles as recorded in the scriptures, and stop paying so much attention to the teachings and traditions of corrupted, man made, religious organizations.
I have not left the teachings of the Apostles ... and I have not ignored the Tradition of the Apostles either ... a tradition that is specifically referred to in scripture ... a tradition that both Rome and Constantinople have carefuly guarded for nearly 2,000 years. So, you are saying in effect that I should do what? Listen to Mike S. and follow his pure and perfect teachings? No, you are just a corrupt man. Should I follow my own teachings and be my own Church? Am I also not just a corrupt man like you or anyone else?
Jesus Christ clearly stated in John 14 that the Holy Spirit would teach and comfort us (the Church) ... it is the Holy Spirit that is in charge until Jesus returns ... so, is the Holy Spirit leading me more than say a fellow Christian? More and a Protestant Pastor? More than a Priest? More than the Pope of Rome? More than the Patriarch of the Orthodox? You make no case for anything ... you only attempt to tear down what I accept. Who or what does the Holy Spirit lead? Or in your case the you consider the Holy Spirit to be a non-person and inanimate divine evergy-like power called holy spirit. That's your right and I make no judgments of you for it. I believe you are in error, but I would not accuse you of leaving Christ's teachings. Ahven't we all had enough of judgmentalism for one lifetime?
Christ's true church does not exist today in the form of any religious organization. Rather you will find Christ's true church wherever two or three of His followers are gathered together in His name, in church buildings owned by all Christian denominations and in places which have no connection to any of them.
Catholics are universal Christians and the Catholic Church is the universal Church. They acept their brothers and sisters in other denominations. Catholics simply have no argument about this and no need to run around and tell everyone that their brand of non-Catholic Christianity is wrong. Catholics mind their own business. Catholics merely carry on the teachings and traditions that have withstood the test of nearly 2,000 years ... inspite of others and inspite of themselves. Catholics have done wrong and bongheaded things ... Catholics have done immoral and hurtful things ... and so have any other Christians ... Catholics are sinners ... so, who on this board, including you Mike, is without sin? If so, then let them start casting stones.
Thanks for your comments and interest in my thread. I will post on the two things I said I would, so I lok forward to your response ... but I hope that you will take a different, more moderate tone.
Jim Whitney
