Not Offended by the Vatican

( cont ) applies ! They are to COME TO appliers of the rule , compare and CONTRADICT if necessary ! And the SCRIPTURE ( which reins in even tradition ) must hold sway ! wroach4@yahoo.com ( I welcome any corrections to my post ! )

( cont ) perfect man , not there yet , as the church , according to the Scripture ! ) , we must be ready to change and SUBMIT to scripture ! " The magisterium " is properly spirit-filled believers ! All believers submit to God . " Obey the authorities , " but " we must obey God rather than man . " ( my paraphrase ) Both . We must not do one without the other . Every Christian's ultimate allegiance is God the Father , in the Holy Spirit , through Jesus Christ ! We must HELP EACH OTHER to submit to Scripture ! It is a BALANCING ACT . We must ACKNOWLEDGE apostolic-succession ! We must ACKNOWLEDGE the existence of Pauls ! We must ACKNOWLEDGE prophets in the church ( CHECKED by scripture , as the Bible directs ! ) , as in the new testament AFTER John the Baptist and AFTER Jesus Christ's ascension into HEAVEN ! We must ACKNOWLEDGE that Jesus ( not just other Christians ) creates new Christians ( like Paul ) ! THEY HAVE EQUAL AUTHORITY , whether or not " rule " ( cont )

( cont ) tradition and scripture must AGREE ! AND Pauls and Peters must agree ! AND the very " Paulness " of Pauls is to proclaim the truth SEPARATELY , under separate authority THOUGH HEARD from inheritors of apostolic succession because such teaching comes from GOD and also must agree with Scripture ! When BOTH agree with Scripture , there is no division ! I perceive that the churches and " ecclesial bodies " ( so-called ) , where EACH diverges from scripture EACH fosters division ! Where EACH runs too far along its rope WITHOUT THE OTHER , each misses the POINT ! Unity . And IN ANY POINT , whether it be PAPAL AUTHORITY ( that is , one bishop unchecked by other elders in the church , which is unscriptural , and thus untouchable rather than PUBLICLY rebuked by OTHER AUTHORITIES ) or any other point which has in practice become UNSCRIPTURAL , no matter how lovingly and well-intentionally fostered and upheld , while inaccurate ( because we are BEING built up into a ( cont )

( cont ) these congregations , these very congregations might argue ? i would say that God continues to call Pauls whether these congregations formed by laying-on-of-hands apostolic-succession authority of rule [ versus of theology ] ) are involved or not ! How to know ? These Pauls will agree with scripture . And when judging Christian scripture and Christian tradition as authoritative ? Christian tradition is authoritative ONLY INSOFAR AS it upholds Scripture ! Read the apostles . There IS a place for tradition ( what is spoken as well as written ) ! Which upholds scripture . Prophets are to be judged by Scripture ! Tradition is to UPHOLD scripture , not diverge from it ! Where it diverges , it is to be reined in ! Tradition as a HELP to upholding Scripture is one thing ! Tradition is an INTERFERENCE to upholding Scripture has got to GO ! There is no argument against tradition ! There is no argument against WELL-MEANING adherence to Tradition ! HOWEVER , ( cont )

( cont ) with whom Martin Luther took issue ? And would the pope , then , the bishop of Rome , bishop among bishops , be CHECKED by his fellow elders , or would he claim PAPAL AUTHORITY ( turned over to him anti-biblically by his PEERS , ignoring other aspects besides AUTHORITY , perhaps due to tradition , useful but inaccurate at times ) and REFUSE to be checked ! My understanding is that Luther had specific disagreements with different points , and would these have been addressed , would the judging body have yielded to the scripture ( which it is our job to teach , as the Bible says , with apostolic authority ) , or would the congregation so called into question have proved itself one ( God forbid ) tickling the ears of the people and not a congregation in fact , but taken over by wolves , whether Christians remained in the body or not , and rendered ineffective ? When these bodies will not hear , we are to shake the dust off our feet ( and are we authentic apostles sent to ( cont )

( cont )Christianity arose FROM JESUS ! It works TOGETHER with apostolic authority and indeed BECOMES PART OF IT , not by handed-down authority of that " apostolic authority " by INDEPENDENTLY of it , by the authority of JESUS , and the teaching will AGREE , and it will call for the PRACTICE of what the apostles are called to PREACH . Believers baptized by PAUL ( who admittedly baptized FEW ) ARE APOSTOLIC INDEPENDENT OF JESUS' EARTHLY APOSTLES and PART OF THE BODY . Pauls arise even today . God calls ! Apostolic-succession IS NOT NECESSARY ( as it was not with Paul ) to create new Christians ! But Pauls will CHECK the church and call for UNITY ! But in Truth . Otherwise , Pauls call for a RETURN TO TRUTH ! And Peters had better listen ! BOTH are necessary ! Back to the original argument , that Martin Luther perhaps avoided biblical procedure , whether ignorant himself or due to the teaching of his own CHURCH ! Was the pope , then , actually the Christian with whom ( cont )

( cont ) apostolic church related to the congregation in Rome , having been exposed to Christianity through that church's members ( as Paul was exposed to the Christianity of Stephen , whom he persecuted ) . The apostolic church related to the congregation in Rome sees , then , these folks as believers in the word expressed in fact ( whether accurate in all details or no , as that one corrected by Priscilla and Aquilla in the new testament ) , but children of renegade believers who did not " check in " with the authorities of the apostolic church related to the congregation in Rome and thus are " out of order . " They lump Paul in with the apostles and deny his special calling " along-side " of the apostles , and his function within the church , not only to carry out a job , but also to CHECK the apostolic church . The so-called " ecclesial bodies " are apostolic in doctrine , not in rule , EXCEPT where Paul applies . A SEPARATE STRAIN of albeit authentic , agreeing ( cont )

( cont ) him , though supporting him ) , is to miss the point of the CHURCHES today . There will always be apostles handed-on by apostolic succession from earthly person to earthly person in a line from Jesus AND there will always be " pauls " called by God PRIOR to any hands-on ordination by those in the hands-on apostolic lineage WITH EQUAL AUTHORITY . THESE WORK TOGETHER . Upholding the apostolic succession is an important function of the church AND upholding " pauline calling " is an important function of the church which claims to be co-founded by Paul . Paul , indeed , preached BEFORE receiving sanction of the apostles , based on his calling by Jesus . They met , and agreed on their teaching . And DISAGREED . Pauls , called by God , ARE BY NATURE ( spiritual nature ) TO DISAGREE with the church of apostolic succession WHEN NECESSARY and are to be accepted IN THAT FUNCTION when correct . Teaching-wise , the so-called " ecclesial bodies " are generations of the ( cont )

( cont ) without a confirming witness ; however , it is clear that elders/leaders in the church should be publicly rebuked when necessary . That would include the bishop , including the bishop of Rome ( the " pope " ) ! Never was there a case where " peter " could not be rebuked by his fellows ! The " fellow " responsible in the Bible was Paul ! Interestingly , Paul was chosen by Jesus OUTSIDE apostolic authority ! He was received BY the apostles , authorized BY Jesus OUTSIDE " apostolic succession , " and CALLED TO TASK apostles , the APOSTLE called by Jesus OUTSIDE the twelve . He both confirmed and CHECKED Peter . Peter both confirmed and supported Paul ! Not to differentiate between the method of calling , that is , the physical hands-on calling of Peter through Judas and Judas' replacement by the earthly Jesus , and the spiritual calling of Paul IN ADDITION TO the other apostles , that is , an outside CHECK to the apostles ( as they had opportunity to be with ( cont )

The tack to take was to call out the particular persons engaging in unbiblical doctrine/practice by approaching them first singly , then with a witness , then approaching the body of elders in authority over that person . When Martin Luther had his problem , rather than following academic procedure , he was to have done this ! In the event he could find no witness ( even required at the time portrayed in Revelation ) to be his second , the matter was ended . With agreement from another , and the Bible , he was , in the event , the particular person/s argued the point and he and the witness remained in agreement , then he was to address the authority . The authority would decide and advise Luther . Now , had Luther the same problem , or perhaps the problem was , with the authority , he would , with a second , follow that procedure with that authority or that authoritative body , appealing to their authority/ies . The Bible says not to accept an accusation against an elder ( cont )

parousia70, excellent post! It addresses the tendnecy of evangelical and other Protestant groups to couch the debate in terms of the Bible, conveniently exvluding the verses that define what Christ's Church must be. If those Scriptural references are not exvluded, they are usually given interpretations that stretch common sense and rules of language, such as Matt 16:18-19; Eph 3:21. Instead, the forms and trappings of worship are used to try to discredit the Mother Church as un-Christianm or it's leadership as, somehow, un-Biblical. This, of course, using their own subjective, personal interpretation of the Word, not a consistant, historical interpretation shared by all believers. That is the strength of the Catholic Church, her unbroken lineage that goes back to Peter, her inspired consistancy of doctrine and belief that unites Catholics, worldwide. Other denominations just don't meet the same Scriptural standards, as you so cogently stated in your post.

I agree with the author that this should not be an emotional debate, rather an opportunity to be respectfully candid and scripture based. I welcome sober, reasoned scriptural rebuttal, but I'm convinced that the author is wrong in his assertions.

The Church of scripture is one united ecclesial body (Eph 4:3-4; Eph 4:13-16; Jn 17:21; Mt 16:18) without schismatic divisions (1 Cor 12:25; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 1:10; Jude 1:19; Gal 5:20; 3 John 1:9-10), with one teaching for all the churches (Acts 15:22-23,25,28/Acts 16:4-5; 1 Tim 1:3; 1 Cor 1:10; Eph 4:5; Jude 1:3), and one bishopric authorized of and by the apostles (Titus 1:5) by the laying on of hands in ordination (Heb 6:2; 2 Tim 1:6; 1 Tim 4:14; Titus 1:5), sharing ministers back and forth among all churches (1 Cor 16:3; Rom 16:1,3,9,21,23; Phil 2:19,25; Titus 3:12), receiving one another in fellowship and in greeting (Rom 15:5-7; Rom 16:16; Col 4:10,12,14; 3 John 1:9-10), where excommunication removes individuals from this one body (Matt 18:17; 1 Corinthians 5:1-2,4-5), and which existed from St. Peter and the apostles unto today (Matt 16:18-19; Eph 3:21).

Protestantism, in contrast, is literally thousands of separatist ecclesial governments that do not share one ecclesial body, that have endless schismatic divisions, that share no united teaching for all churches, that contain no authorized bishopric dating to the apostles, that do not share ministers between all churches, that do not receieve all members both in fellowship and greeting, and which have no effective excommunication.