Are you saying it is heresay according to acquinas to email persons who believe differently? That doesn't make sense. Since Paul went to Rome. Paul heard what the Romans were saying then taught them. I don't mean to upset the apple cart. What is wrong with discussing it? Am I interested in joining the Catholic Church? No. That is not the reason for the interest. But I am interested. What does the Holy Ghost say about truth? It will set you free. Free to think, ponder and pray for more truth. I have asked and sought all my life and would gladly do whatever the Lord wanted me to do. He says ask, seek, and knock. I have not lead a perfect life, but through helping others among other things, my life is acceptable to Him. This does not include shunning others who feel about Christ in their own way. What ever happened to the missionary cause of the Christian Church? How similar is the church today with Christs ancient church? Where are the apostles, PRophets, evangelists, etc, etc,???? This is a fair question. A question which any church claiming to be His church must answer if they have any claim. Let's put it simply, His name, His doctrine, His authority must all be present, in an on the church claiming to be true.

-- Frank Godfrey (fgodfrey@macu.org), October 07, 2003

Answers

"What does the Holy Ghost say about truth? It will set you free."

A: He also says that he will guide one Church to ALL truth; and that Church obviously is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, no other. Therefore, in order to find the fullness of truth, you must first identify the one Church to which that divine promise was given.

"This does not include shunning others who feel about Christ in their own way."

A: "Feeling about Christ" is one thing. Certainly different people experience different emotional responses to God's working in their lives. What you "feel" about Christ is a personal matter. But what you BELIEVE about Christ is either objectively true or objectively false, and it is most important to be able to KNOW with certainty - not just to "feel certain" - that what you believe is the truth. That's why Christ guaranteed that the Holy Spirit would guide HIS Church to all truth.

"What ever happened to the missionary cause of the Christian Church?"

A: Well let's see. There are currently over a billion Catholics, with well over a hundred thousand new adult converts every year. Catholic missionaries are currently serving in every nation on earth - a claim that cannot be made by any other church. The Catholic Church received a commission from Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago, to go forth and make disciples of all peoples, and it has been obedient to that command in every generation since.

"How similar is the church today with Christs ancient church? Where are the apostles, PRophets, evangelists, etc, etc,????"

A: The bishops of the Catholic Church are the direct successors of the Apostles. the Pope is the direct successor of Peter, the first Apostolic head. What do you mean by "prophets"? The deposit of faith is complete. The work of the Prophets, preparing people for the coming of the Messiah, is finished. God does still speak through members of His Church, but not in the revelation of new doctrine, and obviously not in terms of the coming of the Messiah. What do you mean by "evangelists"? The canon of scripture is closed for all time. God is no longer inspiring men to write scriptural texts. Or, are you using "evangelist" in the broader sense, meaning those who spread the faith, bringing the good news of salvation to others"? If so, see comments above under "missionaries".

"Let's put it simply, His name, His doctrine, His authority must all be present, in an on the church claiming to be true."

A: You are correct! Of course, anyone can use His Name, with or without authorization, so that really is not a reliable criterion for identifying His Church. There are thousands of churches which use His Name. Even some non-Christian ones! His doctrine is the doctrine taught by the Church He founded. History clearly identifies that Church as the Holy Catholic Church, the only Christian Church which can trace its existence directly back to the first century. History also records which specific doctrinal beliefs were discarded in the formation of all subsequent churches. Therefore, the fullness of his doctrine remains right where He promised that the Holy Spirit would place it - in the Church He founded, no other. His authority rests in that Church to which He said "he who hears you hears Me"; "Whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven". Again, since it is a historical fact that no Christian Church existed on earth before the 11th century except the Catholic Church, it is therefore necessarily true that the Catholic Church was the Church in which He invested this authority. Authoritative writings of this one Church, the Catholic Church, exist from every age since, maintaining the constant, unchanging fullness of Christian teaching and worship throughout the centuries.

In His Church, and his Church alone, you can discover the worship of His Name in the manner He himself commanded at the Last Supper; the fullness of true doctrine, without contradiction or compromise, without division into conflicting denominations; and the fullness of divine authority, granted by the words of Jesus Christ Himself, and symbolized by the keys to the kingdon, entrusted into the hands of Blessed Peter alone, the first divinely-appointed earthly head of His One True Church.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 07, 2003.

Actually you might be suprised how close the Church now is like the Church of the past.

Also the Church does a very good job as a missionary. I read an article about converts in Mongolia. A protestant minister said that the Catholics have a much easier time converting people because they stick around. While us protestants come for 2 years and then leave.

You are just blinded by your hatered to see what else the Church does. You only think that the Church has mass and cares about money and what not. But the Church is so much more than that. Who is the first religious institution to speak out against violence against the innocent? NOT THE PROTESTANTS. Who defends peoples rights to religious freedom? NOT THE PROTESTANTS. What faith defended the Jews in WWII? NOT A PROTESTANT ONE. What faith is hated for their view on unborn children and criminals on death row? THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Don't just think that the Catholic Church gets rapped up in traditions. So do protestants. Look at Calvin and the people that inherited his beliefs. Baptists, Church of Chist, Church of God, Amish, Quakers, and so on.

The point is that people who attack the Church always attack traditions that offend them. But they never do enough research into what the Church is really about.

If you want to know real religious history there are some great courses that you can take at Indiana University.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), October 08, 2003.

Paul M.'s response to American-Protestant individualistic ecclesial autonomy/epistemology was excellent! Insofar as the Church has always understood herself to be "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic," UNITY and CONTINUITY must be intrinsic to the Christian Gospel. Therefore, Protestant division is fundamentally sinful (i.e. anti- Christian).

However, as an Orthodox catechumen from a Protestant background, I would inquire of Paul M. if social, political, and cultural factors of Medieval and Enlightenment Europe contributed to a theological over emphasis on the see of St. Peter which permitted such regrets as the Filioque insertion. Not that such regrets jeopardize the ecclesial authority/integrity of the Roman Catholic Church, but rather that Eastern Orthodoxy is equipped to help Rome protect the precious deposit of the Faith. It would seem that the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church both pocess valid claims to being Christ's True Church; a claim that Protestant can never hold and is outrageous when they do!

I fear that the contemporary Ecumencial Movement is simply a means of justifying Protestant individualistic perogatives while still claiming to be part of the True Church! Ludicrous!

Ecclesial division severely enervates if not totally invalidates the Christian Gospel. As such, true ECUMENISM for Protestants means CONVERSION to either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church. Then the Catholic and Orthodox should humbly seek true reconciliation. The Schism and aftermath of 1054 was the Faith's most tragic hour. The over-emphasized authority of the Papacy is no longer necessary (the faith is established, Prostetant German Liberalism is no longer a real threat, the negative implication of Western philosophical categories have been exposed). Rome should remove the Filioque from the Creed and the East and West actively pursue reconciliation with each other. The Protestant should simly shut-up and convert.

Mark

-- Mark J (markjohnsonesq@yahoo.com), November 13, 2003.

Dear Mark,

You state: "Insofar as the Church has always understood herself to be "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic," UNITY and CONTINUITY must be intrinsic to the Christian Gospel. Therefore, Protestant division is fundamentally sinful"

A: Why would you suppose that Orthodox division is acceptable while Protestant division is not?

"I would inquire of Paul M. if social, political, and cultural factors of Medieval and Enlightenment Europe contributed to a theological over emphasis on the see of St. Peter which permitted such regrets as the Filioque insertion."

A: I fail to see how the see of St. Peter could be OVER emphasized, given that it is the ONLY see established by Jesus Christ. There is only one set of keys to the kingdom, and that set was given by Christ to Peter and no other. One Church can be built on only one foundation, and Christ told Simon Peter, no other, that he was that foundational Rock. Peter alone was given the specific pastoral directive to "feed my lambs; feed my sheep". And Peter alone was given the personal, individual powers of binding and loosing. What see other than his could expect to be accepted on an equal basis?

"Eastern Orthodoxy is equipped to help Rome protect the precious deposit of the Faith."

A: Peter's infallibility and the collective infallibility of those teaching in full communion with him is the principle safeguard Christ provided for the deposit of the faith. He promised that the Holy Spirit would guide His Church - the one He founded, which existed at the time He made this promise - to all truth. What further "help" could the Church possibly require?

"It would seem that the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church both possess valid claims to being Christ's True Church"

A: Given that Christ established His Church in the first century, while the Orthodox Church was established in the 11th century; and given that Christ designated Peter alone as the guardian of the keys, the universal symbol of ultimate authority; and given that the Orthodox Church has subsequently formally rejected that God-given authority, I see no similarity whatsoever between their respective claims.

"Ecclesial division severely enervates if not totally invalidates the Christian Gospel."

A: Indeed! Doesn't schism qualify as "ecclesial division"?

"The over-emphasized authority of the Papacy is no longer necessary (the faith is established, Prostetant German Liberalism is no longer a real threat, the negative implication of Western philosophical categories have been exposed)"

A: I repeat, an absolute cannot be "OVER" emphasized. "Over" emphasis suggests alternatives which might share the emphasis. An absolute, such as the ONE Vicar of Christ, the SOLE recipient of the keys and the authority they symbolize, necessarily must be exclusively emphasized, for there is no viable alternative. Christ did not appoint His Vicar for political reasons. It had nothing to do with German liberalism or Western philosophies. It had to do with the facts that truth is what sets men free; that truth cannot exist except in the presence of unity; and that unity cannot exist except under the guidance of genuine authority. That is just as true today as it was 2,000 years ago.

"Rome should remove the Filioque from the Creed and the East and West actively pursue reconciliation with each other"

A: The Filoque is a statement of an intrinsic element of the Deposit of Faith. It CANNOT be "removed" any more than the Trinity could be "removed". The Creed(s) are documents of the Catholic Church, expressing the official beliefs of the Catholic Church. They are not scripture, nor are they immutable. They are of course infallible, and nothing contrary to the stated articles of the faith expressed therein would be acceptable. However, the Church surely has full authority to revise the wording of its own documents in order to more fully and perfectly articulate its full understanding of the articles of the faith therein stated.

The Eastern and the Western Rites of Christ's Church remain in full communion under the Vicar of Christ, the Successor of Peter, just as they always have been. Reconciliation between that united Church and the Orthodox Churches can be achieved only if and when the Orthodox unconditionally return to the One Church established by Jesus Christ for all men, upon the foundation of Simon Peter and the Apostles.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 16, 2003.