Victor R. Claveau, MJ
In committing His Church to the special care of the apostles and their successors, Christ also included the custody of the written Scriptures, the unwritten oral traditions, and all of the divine ordinances and observances.
Thus, after His Last Supper, Jesus said to His apostles, “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of Truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.”[i] “And I will ask pray the Father, and He will give you another Counselor, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.”[ii] And “…I am with you always, to the close of the age.”[iii]
From these citations it is evident that Christ established a single, Church, endowed it with all truth, with a single and definite code of principles and observances, and with a priesthood who were to be its special guardians, dispensers, and perpetuators. As the written Scriptures were only a part of the divine legacy, a Church and an authorized ecclesiastical corporation were absolutely necessary to secure the preservation and the integrity of the unwritten traditions, and of the “many other things which Jesus did,”[iv] not to be found in books. In no other manner could all the sacred teachings of Jesus have been preserved and transmitted through so many centuries. And we may be quite certain that the holy records and commandments of God have been preserved within the Church in their original purity, from the fact that “the Spirit of truth has always abided in it and taught it, all truth according to the divine promise.” This Heavenly influence has undoubtedly been ever present in the great ecclesiastical councils of the Church, to aid the faithful ambassadors of Christ in their efforts to exclude error, and to preserve the truth; and where the Spirit of truth is, error and falsehood cannot stand.
In accordance with these principles, and with a view of preserving the unity of the Church, it has been the universal custom to refer all unsettled points of doctrine, and all individual corruptions and abuses within the Church, to ecclesiastical councils. These councils have always been composed of large numbers of the most learned, pious, and able bishops and prelates of the world, and their decisions have always been regarded as authoritative. Whenever individuals endeavored to pervert the true meaning of the Scriptures, and to found cults or sects upon these perversions, the pontiffs convened ecclesiastical councils to examine, discuss, and correct erroneous conclusions, and to define and preserve in their canons the Christian truths as they came from Jesus Christ. Thus, the personal innovations of Montanus, Donatus, Novatian, Arius, and a host of early heretics were disposed of and the unity of the Church maintained.
The advocates of private interpretation, and of what has been flippantly termed “freedom of conscience,” tell us that every person is competent to interpret the mysteries of the gospel. Therefore, each individual, however ignorant, should read his Bible, analyze its sacred mysteries, boldly cope with the idiomatic and other peculiarities of an age long past, of ideas originally expressed in various languages abounding in figures, parables, and the like, and then form his conclusions, and act in accordance with them. Is such a course calculated to secure unity of faith, harmony among Christians, uniformity and consistency in worship, and concert of action among those who desire to build up the Church of the living God? Let the innumerable and conflicting sects of modern Protestantism, their absurd and contradictory tenets, and the numerous and protracted religious wars among the heretics of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries answer.
The great masses of the Christian world are endowed with a limited amount of knowledge, and with limited intellectual capacities. For the most part their energies are absorbed by their ordinary worldly pursuits, so that they have neither the time nor the inclination to become private theologians. Practically, therefore, they accept a Hus, a Wyclif, a Luther, a Calvin, a Wesley, a Joseph Smith, or a Brigham Young, as their interpreters of Holy Scripture, and enroll themselves under the standard of some one of these creed-counterfeiters. In this manner they become passive instruments in the hands of these “false teachers,” and thus contribute to impair the unity of the faith, to divide and distract Christendom, and to encourage the various forms of infidelity. Are the private and individual interpretations of these leading dissenters, or of their ignorant disciples, to be regarded as authoritative, while the decisions of the great councils, some of them composed of as many as five hundred of the wisest and best prelates of the world, and holding their sessions for years in succession, are to be ignored and despised? Surely there can be but few people so lost to all sense of integrity as to seriously claim that an uneducated layman is as capable of interpreting and understanding the Holy Bible as were the three hundred and eighteen learned fathers of Nicea, or the five hundred of Chalcedon, or the three hundred of Trent. What have been the results of this authoritative interpretation of the Scriptures by the councils of the Church? The known facts have shown unity and uniformity of faith, in ecclesiastical organization, in worship, and in the propagation of the Christian religion. And what have been the results of private inspiration and private interpretation? Innumerable variations of religious belief, a vast multiplication of conflicting sects, a house divided against itself, and an entire lack of that unity, harmony, and plan of action which pertain to the true Church of God.
In worldly affairs most people never presume to act without competent advice. We would never compromise our financial interests, or our lives, by becoming our own private interpreters and practitioners of law or medicine. Both the legal and the medical books are before us, written by modern authors, in clear and explicit language; but we have too much practical common-sense to attempt their interpretation, preferring always to employ expert lawyers and doctors, to accept their interpretations, and to act in accordance with their advice. Were the average uneducated person to read a book on the theory and practice of medicine, and then assume the medical treatment of typhus or cholera, he would be locked up in a mental institution, or indicted for a crime. Such an act would excite the indignation and horror of every right-minded person. But, let the same person turn theologian, and, with Bible in hand, interpret the mysteries of godliness, and prescribe for his spiritual being, his assurance is winked at, and his decisions are esteemed legitimate and worthy of practical adoption, whatever they may be.
No Protestant will presume to assert that Christ established more than one Church, more than one priesthood, more than one religious code, more than one form and mode of worship. No rational person can believe that Christ gave a general permission to all men indiscriminately to interpret the Scriptures, to retain or to reject certain portions, to determine what traditions are true and what false, and upon these private opinions to found new churches, new priesthoods, new creeds, and new forms of worship. No one can suppose that Christ intended that there should be divisions, wrangling, and distractions in His Church. No one can imagine that he is doing God service by aiding in the destruction of Church unity, in the establishment of new sects, and in presenting to the world the sad spectacle of the house of God distracted, perverted, torn, and arrayed against itself. Does anyone believe that Christ failed in His solemn promise of being with His one Church, and maintaining it in its purity, through the abiding presence of the Spirit of truth, during the fifteen hundred years preceding the wicked innovations of Luther and Calvin? Did the Almighty postpone the development of His grand plan of redemption until the sixteenth century, waiting for Martin Luther to be born, in order to unravel, explain, and bring into practical operation the sacred mysteries which Christ, the apostles, and their successors, had vainly attempted to introduce? Were the holy apostles, the ancient fathers, the hosts of martyrs, and the Christian missionaries of the past, failures? Was Christ’s Church hidden under a bushel until the monk of Erfurt dragged Christianity from her profound sleep of so many ages under the form and designation-not of Christianity, not of the religion of Jesus, not of catholicity but of Lutheranism? St. Clement, St. Polycarp, and St. Ignatius, were pupils of the apostles, had often conversed with them and heard them preach. These men recognized the Roman Catholic Church as the only Church of God, the supremacy of the Roman bishop, and the divine authority of the ecclesiastical body to act as conservators and interpreters of the written and unwritten word of God. Were these friends and disciples of the apostles mistaken; and were their successors through whom these truths were transmitted from generation to generation for so many centuries, like Saints Irenæus, Origen, Cyprian, Cyril, Hilary, Basil, Ambrose, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Vincent, and a host of other holy fathers-were they all mistaken? And was the light of the true Church latent and unproductive from the days of the apostles to the days of the innovators? And was it reserved to a demon-inspired Augustine monk of the sixteenth century to present to mankind the new dispensation which Jesus, His inspired apostles, and their successors had tried, but failed to make known? Is it probable that the Almighty Father would send His only-begotten Son to earth, to announce a new gospel, and to found a Church, and then to permit an organized hierarchy to set aside this gospel and this Church, and to substitute in their stead a false religion and a false church? When the all- merciful God became incarnate on earth, and suffered and died to atone for the sins of men, is it probable that He had any special reference to Martin Luther, John Calvin, or John Wesley, or other modern revolutionist, in the consummation of the grand design? If so, were Luther’s interviews and discussions with the devil at the Castle of Wartburg, or his revels at the “Black Eagle Tavern” at Guttenburg, or his marriage to the nun, Catherine von Bora, or the bloody civil wars he incited in Germany included in the program?
Eugenio Zolli, the former Chief Rabbi of Rome, converted to Catholicism and was baptized in the Basilica of St. Mary of the Angels on February 17, 1945. His mother was a German-Jewess and on her side of the family there was actually 130 years of rabbinical tradition. As Chief Rabbi of Rome, the Gestapo offered a substantial reward for his capture. Yet, he offered himself as hostage to the Nazi forces then occupying the city if they would release several hundred of his fellow Jews.
Jews, and especially the Rabbis of the Orthodox group, do not become Christians light-mindedly, nor without powerful help from God. When he was asked why he had given up the Synagogue for the Church, he gave an answer that showed his understanding of his present position: “I have not given it up. Christianity is the integration (completion or crown of the Synagogue. For, the Synagogue was a promise, and Christianity is the fulfillment of that promise. The Synagogue pointed to Christianity: Christianity presupposes the Synagogue. So you see, one cannot exist without the other. What I converted to was the living Christianity.”[v]
When Zolli was asked why he had not joined one of the Protestant denominations, which are also Christian, he answered:
“Because protesting is not attesting. I do not intend to embarrass anyone by asking: ‘Why wait 1,500 years to protest?’ The Catholic Church was recognized by the whole Christian world as the true Church of God for 15 consecutive centuries. No man can halt at the end of those 1,500 years and say that the Catholic Church is not the true Church of Christ without embarrassing himself seriously. I can accept only that Church which preached to all creatures by my own forefathers, the Twelve (Apostles) who, like me, issued from the Synagogue.”[vi]
Whoever examines thoroughly and fairly the legitimate doctrines of the Catholic Church, as inculcated in the decrees and canons of the great ecclesiastical Councils, from Nicene to Trent, and compares them with those taught by Christ and His apostles, must admit their identity in everything essential to salvation. Such an examination and comparison, impartially and boldly conducted, would restore thousands of doubting dissenters into the fold of unity and spiritual peace.
[v] Eugenio Zolli, Why I Became a Catholic, (Fort Collins, CO., Roman Catholic Books)1996. From the introduction.
[vi] Ibid.
CHRIST’S CHURCH
Victor R. Claveau, MJ
In committing His Church to the special care of the apostles and their successors, Christ also included the custody of the written Scriptures, the unwritten oral traditions, and all of the divine ordinances and observances.
Thus, after His Last Supper, Jesus said to His apostles, “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of Truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.”[i] “And I will ask pray the Father, and He will give you another Counselor, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.”[ii] And “…I am with you always, to the close of the age.”[iii]
From these citations it is evident that Christ established a single, Church, endowed it with all truth, with a single and definite code of principles and observances, and with a priesthood who were to be its special guardians, dispensers, and perpetuators. As the written Scriptures were only a part of the divine legacy, a Church and an authorized ecclesiastical corporation were absolutely necessary to secure the preservation and the integrity of the unwritten traditions, and of the “many other things which Jesus did,”[iv] not to be found in books. In no other manner could all the sacred teachings of Jesus have been preserved and transmitted through so many centuries. And we may be quite certain that the holy records and commandments of God have been preserved within the Church in their original purity, from the fact that “the Spirit of truth has always abided in it and taught it, all truth according to the divine promise.” This Heavenly influence has undoubtedly been ever present in the great ecclesiastical councils of the Church, to aid the faithful ambassadors of Christ in their efforts to exclude error, and to preserve the truth; and where the Spirit of truth is, error and falsehood cannot stand.
In accordance with these principles, and with a view of preserving the unity of the Church, it has been the universal custom to refer all unsettled points of doctrine, and all individual corruptions and abuses within the Church, to ecclesiastical councils. These councils have always been composed of large numbers of the most learned, pious, and able bishops and prelates of the world, and their decisions have always been regarded as authoritative. Whenever individuals endeavored to pervert the true meaning of the Scriptures, and to found cults or sects upon these perversions, the pontiffs convened ecclesiastical councils to examine, discuss, and correct erroneous conclusions, and to define and preserve in their canons the Christian truths as they came from Jesus Christ. Thus, the personal innovations of Montanus, Donatus, Novatian, Arius, and a host of early heretics were disposed of and the unity of the Church maintained.
The advocates of private interpretation, and of what has been flippantly termed “freedom of conscience,” tell us that every person is competent to interpret the mysteries of the gospel. Therefore, each individual, however ignorant, should read his Bible, analyze its sacred mysteries, boldly cope with the idiomatic and other peculiarities of an age long past, of ideas originally expressed in various languages abounding in figures, parables, and the like, and then form his conclusions, and act in accordance with them. Is such a course calculated to secure unity of faith, harmony among Christians, uniformity and consistency in worship, and concert of action among those who desire to build up the Church of the living God? Let the innumerable and conflicting sects of modern Protestantism, their absurd and contradictory tenets, and the numerous and protracted religious wars among the heretics of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries answer.
The great masses of the Christian world are endowed with a limited amount of knowledge, and with limited intellectual capacities. For the most part their energies are absorbed by their ordinary worldly pursuits, so that they have neither the time nor the inclination to become private theologians. Practically, therefore, they accept a Hus, a Wyclif, a Luther, a Calvin, a Wesley, a Joseph Smith, or a Brigham Young, as their interpreters of Holy Scripture, and enroll themselves under the standard of some one of these creed-counterfeiters. In this manner they become passive instruments in the hands of these “false teachers,” and thus contribute to impair the unity of the faith, to divide and distract Christendom, and to encourage the various forms of infidelity. Are the private and individual interpretations of these leading dissenters, or of their ignorant disciples, to be regarded as authoritative, while the decisions of the great councils, some of them composed of as many as five hundred of the wisest and best prelates of the world, and holding their sessions for years in succession, are to be ignored and despised? Surely there can be but few people so lost to all sense of integrity as to seriously claim that an uneducated layman is as capable of interpreting and understanding the Holy Bible as were the three hundred and eighteen learned fathers of Nicea, or the five hundred of Chalcedon, or the three hundred of Trent. What have been the results of this authoritative interpretation of the Scriptures by the councils of the Church? The known facts have shown unity and uniformity of faith, in ecclesiastical organization, in worship, and in the propagation of the Christian religion. And what have been the results of private inspiration and private interpretation? Innumerable variations of religious belief, a vast multiplication of conflicting sects, a house divided against itself, and an entire lack of that unity, harmony, and plan of action which pertain to the true Church of God.
In worldly affairs most people never presume to act without competent advice. We would never compromise our financial interests, or our lives, by becoming our own private interpreters and practitioners of law or medicine. Both the legal and the medical books are before us, written by modern authors, in clear and explicit language; but we have too much practical common-sense to attempt their interpretation, preferring always to employ expert lawyers and doctors, to accept their interpretations, and to act in accordance with their advice. Were the average uneducated person to read a book on the theory and practice of medicine, and then assume the medical treatment of typhus or cholera, he would be locked up in a mental institution, or indicted for a crime. Such an act would excite the indignation and horror of every right-minded person. But, let the same person turn theologian, and, with Bible in hand, interpret the mysteries of godliness, and prescribe for his spiritual being, his assurance is winked at, and his decisions are esteemed legitimate and worthy of practical adoption, whatever they may be.
No Protestant will presume to assert that Christ established more than one Church, more than one priesthood, more than one religious code, more than one form and mode of worship. No rational person can believe that Christ gave a general permission to all men indiscriminately to interpret the Scriptures, to retain or to reject certain portions, to determine what traditions are true and what false, and upon these private opinions to found new churches, new priesthoods, new creeds, and new forms of worship. No one can suppose that Christ intended that there should be divisions, wrangling, and distractions in His Church. No one can imagine that he is doing God service by aiding in the destruction of Church unity, in the establishment of new sects, and in presenting to the world the sad spectacle of the house of God distracted, perverted, torn, and arrayed against itself. Does anyone believe that Christ failed in His solemn promise of being with His one Church, and maintaining it in its purity, through the abiding presence of the Spirit of truth, during the fifteen hundred years preceding the wicked innovations of Luther and Calvin? Did the Almighty postpone the development of His grand plan of redemption until the sixteenth century, waiting for Martin Luther to be born, in order to unravel, explain, and bring into practical operation the sacred mysteries which Christ, the apostles, and their successors, had vainly attempted to introduce? Were the holy apostles, the ancient fathers, the hosts of martyrs, and the Christian missionaries of the past, failures? Was Christ’s Church hidden under a bushel until the monk of Erfurt dragged Christianity from her profound sleep of so many ages under the form and designation-not of Christianity, not of the religion of Jesus, not of catholicity but of Lutheranism? St. Clement, St. Polycarp, and St. Ignatius, were pupils of the apostles, had often conversed with them and heard them preach. These men recognized the Roman Catholic Church as the only Church of God, the supremacy of the Roman bishop, and the divine authority of the ecclesiastical body to act as conservators and interpreters of the written and unwritten word of God. Were these friends and disciples of the apostles mistaken; and were their successors through whom these truths were transmitted from generation to generation for so many centuries, like Saints Irenæus, Origen, Cyprian, Cyril, Hilary, Basil, Ambrose, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Vincent, and a host of other holy fathers-were they all mistaken? And was the light of the true Church latent and unproductive from the days of the apostles to the days of the innovators? And was it reserved to a demon-inspired Augustine monk of the sixteenth century to present to mankind the new dispensation which Jesus, His inspired apostles, and their successors had tried, but failed to make known? Is it probable that the Almighty Father would send His only-begotten Son to earth, to announce a new gospel, and to found a Church, and then to permit an organized hierarchy to set aside this gospel and this Church, and to substitute in their stead a false religion and a false church? When the all- merciful God became incarnate on earth, and suffered and died to atone for the sins of men, is it probable that He had any special reference to Martin Luther, John Calvin, or John Wesley, or other modern revolutionist, in the consummation of the grand design? If so, were Luther’s interviews and discussions with the devil at the Castle of Wartburg, or his revels at the “Black Eagle Tavern” at Guttenburg, or his marriage to the nun, Catherine von Bora, or the bloody civil wars he incited in Germany included in the program?
Eugenio Zolli, the former Chief Rabbi of Rome, converted to Catholicism and was baptized in the Basilica of St. Mary of the Angels on February 17, 1945. His mother was a German-Jewess and on her side of the family there was actually 130 years of rabbinical tradition. As Chief Rabbi of Rome, the Gestapo offered a substantial reward for his capture. Yet, he offered himself as hostage to the Nazi forces then occupying the city if they would release several hundred of his fellow Jews.
Jews, and especially the Rabbis of the Orthodox group, do not become Christians light-mindedly, nor without powerful help from God. When he was asked why he had given up the Synagogue for the Church, he gave an answer that showed his understanding of his present position: “I have not given it up. Christianity is the integration (completion or crown of the Synagogue. For, the Synagogue was a promise, and Christianity is the fulfillment of that promise. The Synagogue pointed to Christianity: Christianity presupposes the Synagogue. So you see, one cannot exist without the other. What I converted to was the living Christianity.”[v]
When Zolli was asked why he had not joined one of the Protestant denominations, which are also Christian, he answered:
“Because protesting is not attesting. I do not intend to embarrass anyone by asking: ‘Why wait 1,500 years to protest?’ The Catholic Church was recognized by the whole Christian world as the true Church of God for 15 consecutive centuries. No man can halt at the end of those 1,500 years and say that the Catholic Church is not the true Church of Christ without embarrassing himself seriously. I can accept only that Church which preached to all creatures by my own forefathers, the Twelve (Apostles) who, like me, issued from the Synagogue.”[vi]
Whoever examines thoroughly and fairly the legitimate doctrines of the Catholic Church, as inculcated in the decrees and canons of the great ecclesiastical Councils, from Nicene to Trent, and compares them with those taught by Christ and His apostles, must admit their identity in everything essential to salvation. Such an examination and comparison, impartially and boldly conducted, would restore thousands of doubting dissenters into the fold of unity and spiritual peace.
[v] Eugenio Zolli, Why I Became a Catholic, (Fort Collins, CO., Roman Catholic Books)1996. From the introduction.
[vi] Ibid.
New Post
The Illiterati
The Fire That Burned in Rose Hawthorne’s Heart
Fanny Allen: The Daughter Who Knelt Before the Tabernacle
Voting Pro Life
The United States has 3,144 counties and county-equivalent jurisdictions, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Today, more than 180 U.S. counties lack a resident Catholic priest. Go to: https://glenmary.org/ You can help by donating: https://glenmary.org/donate-to-catholic-missions…/
The Call Behind the Door
Select A Catagory