Rebuttal to the “indefectibility of the Catholic Church”

“OT Messianic prophecies refer to an unending covenant between God and His people (by extension the Church, led by Jesus Christ) and the unvanquishable Kingdom of Christ:”

God’s People are referred to as His Church, and He will go to great lengths to defend and protect His people. Agreed. However to state that this implies doctrinal perfection in any church denomination would be robbing mankind of his freewill. Human nature is corrupt and unchanging. While man (through Christ) can be sanctified, his human nature is something that must be squelched and battled every single day. Isaiah 64:6 states that at man’s holiest, we are but filthy rags. When looking at church history, it is hard to come to a conclusion that God directs the Church’s motives and endeavors. There have been priests convicted of child molestation, homosexual pastors invited to pulpits, crusades, and all kinds of other obscenities conducted under the name of Christ. If the notion that God manages and conducts a doctrinally perfect group of people, that would immediately alienate and possibly even condemn every denomination and sect of Christianity with the exception of one. So which one would that be? (You propose Catholicism.) The problem is that man is decrepit, and everywhere he travels his ugly footprints mar the earth. There is no blameless religious establishment. Evangelicalism is apathetic, and increasingly banal, just like all the other related denominations. Catholicism has its issues too.

The other issue about the notion of a doctrinally perfect denomination that contradicts with the character of Christ, is that fact that Christ is unchanging. Hebrews 13:8 says that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He is not bound by time, and his attributes and personality have never wavered. If there were such a thing as a “chosen denomination,” then one would assume that the doctrine of those churches would be unchanging, just like the God that directs them. The Problem is, that no such church exists. You wrote (in red responding to what was written in blue):

“The additional element is what we call indefectibility. It is a root assumption of apostolic succession: that the truth will never be lost; it will always be preserved.

(I agree that with the principle “God’s truth will never be lost and will always be preserved.” I think the discrepancy I have, whose responsibility it is to preserve that truth, is a major one. You suggest that man can uphold and preserve that truth. (through God.) I feel that this idea elevates man to a level that he cannot possibly ascend to. II Timothy 3:16 states that all scripture is inspired by God, and John 2:27 clearly says that since God has given us the gift of the Holy Spirit, “you do not need anyone to teach you.” He is not discrediting pastors, popes, ministers, and teachers, but telling us that once God put His Word in print, and bestowed us with the Holy Spirit, we do not need to rely on man {or institutions of man} to tell us what is right or wrong.)

A church that's doctrinally correct today could be doctrinally incorrect fifty years from now.

That is usually the case in Protestantism, yes; WHILE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE REMAINS THE SAME. So Jason's analysis surely applies to Protestants on a large scale.”

Essentially, you propose that the Catholic Church can withstand the scrutiny of time, but I do not see that it does. None of the Christian religions can say that their doctrine has not changed since Christ walked the earth.

This list was composed from various Catholic Church history books written by Catholics. (The principal book I used was “The Teaching of the Catholic Church” by Josef Neuner, S.J. and Heinrich Roos, S.J.) The numbers represent the year these changes were introduced.


· 300 Prayers for the dead
· 300 Making the sign of the cross
· 375 Worship of saints and angels
· 394 Mass first instituted
· 431 Worship of Mary begun
· 500 Priests started dressing differently
· 526 Extreme Unction (anointing the sick)
· 593 Doctrine of Purgatory introduced
· 600 Worship service in Latin
· 600 Prayers directed to Mary
· 607 Boniface III made first pope
· 709 Kissing the pope’s feet
· 786 Worshipping of images and relics
· 850 Use of holy water begun
· 995 Canonization of dead saints
· 998 Fasting on Fridays and during lent
· 1079 Celibacy of priesthood
· 1090 Prayer beads
· 1184 The inquisition (court to discover and punish heretics)
· 1190 Sale of indulgences
· 1215 Transubstantiation
· 1220 Adoration of wafer
· 1229 Bible forbidden to laymen
· 1414 Cup forbidden to people at communion
· 1439 Doctrine of seven sacraments
· 1439 Doctrine of purgatory decreed
· 1508 The Ava Maria approved
· 1534 Jesuit order founded
· 1545 Tradition granted equal authority with the Bible
· 1546 Apocryphal books put into Bible
· 1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary
· 1864 Syllabus of error proclaimed
· 1870 Infallibility of pope declared
· 1930 Public schools condemned
· 1950 Assumption of the virgin Mary (taken to heaven)
· 1965 Mary proclaimed mother of the church


I am in no way trying to conduct an assault on the Catholic Church. Doctrinally, there are a few issues I would tend to disagree with (as with any other denomination) but I respect the Catholic Church a lot more than other brands of Christianity because of their tendency to cling to their fundamental roots. Personally, I choose not to affiliate with a denomination, because I would like people to see me as I am (a twenty-three year old doing everything possible to chase after Christ and study His Word) without being held accountable for other people’s dogmas and actions that I neither condone nor support. Does this mean that because I am not under the Catholic Church that I err, and no matter how hard I try or how much I sacrifice because of my love for Jesus that I am working on my own, out from under His will? What about the countless missionaries who toil their entire lives (some with no religious affiliation) who are sometimes speared, beheaded, and poisoned for trying to show others Jesus’ love? Some return to their homes with crazy stories of miracles and testimonies of things Jesus did for them. Why would God perform miracles and actively support people who claim to be doing His will, but really are not because they are delusional and affiliated with the wrong denomination? Ok, so maybe they are lying, but I am extremely scared to rush to that assumption condemning all the acts of salvation or all the miracles that people experienced apart from the Catholic Church.

Either God is powerful enough to present different things to different people according to their understanding, or truth is bound to those privileged and educated enough to be fully indoctrinated in the one truth. To declare allegiance to a God of the privileged and educated is counterintuitive to the way Christ has explained His intentions through the gospels. Mathew 9:11-13 says that it’s the sick and confused that Jesus came to minister to. Christ came to the world to save us. He shook the system up and revolutionized the way we look at life. In my opinion, He came to this earth to deliver us, and to battle two different things; sin and religion. Religion can be distracting at times. In Jesus’ day the Pharisees were so concerned with legalities and tradition that they were completely oblivious to the fact that the answer to all of their Old Testament Prophecies was walking and teaching right in front of them! Anyone willing to put the research into their writing the way you and some of your readers do is obviously extremely passionate about their faith. It is my prayer that none of us will get to a point in life where our passion for Jesus and the things of God are compromised by the parameters of religion or anything else seeking to quench the fire that God ignited inside of us. Personally, I hope that the momentum my walk with Christ generates is never used against me to push me away from where God wants me.

Frank

To read Dave Armstrong's full essay, and other interesting and in depth studies check out:
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/