From: gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk (G.J. McCaughan)
Subject: Re: Absolution
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 01:36:59 GMT

In article <9209120035.AA22070@motgate.mot.com>, bradk%isdgsm@RTSG.MOT.COM (Brad Kaiser) writes:
> I really ought to go home (it's late here), but I can't resist writing
> one last post today.  In the thread on the Catholic theology of the
> Sacrament of Reconciliation, three list members wrote some very
> similar things:
> 
> [three people suggesting that a cuhrch could be the best going but not
> The One True Church; including me]

> I find this rather shocking.  What all three of these gentlemen seem
> to be *assuming* is that there is some possibility that *NO* True
> Church even exists.  (Okay, Wolfgang is describing others who
> apparently believe that; he didn't really say he believed that
> himself.)

The same goes for me too, actually, though in fact I don't think there's
any church which is "True" in the relevant sense.

> What could that mean?  Obviously *all* churches cannot be true; *TWO*
> churches cannot both be true if they disagree with each other on
> anything concerning faith and morals.  There is one God, and only one.
> Jesus prayed that the church would be one, just as He and His Father
> are one.  He said there would be one flock, and One Shepherd.
> 
> So is there *NO* True Church at all?  Has God deserted us?  Was this
> business about the jaws of hell not prevailing against His church [Mt
> 16:18] just a lie?
> 
> If we really believe that, we shouldn't be Christians at all.  "For
> peace of mind, investigate the Islamic faith." ;-)

I think the "church" Jesus refers to in Matthew 16:18 is the collection of
all believers at all times and in all places, rather than any human organisation.

I don't see why one small (or even fairly large) false belief means that the 
gates of hell have prevailed against the church (or the person) believing it, 
or that God has deserted us. I think it means that people make mistakes, even 
if they are intelligent, wise people with the Spirit in them.

The church is not "one" in the sense of all believing the same things. It is
one in the sense that (as you say) it has one Shepherd, but that does not stop
its members disagreeing. I don't see that this brings Christianity crashing
down on our heads.

Are you suggesting that the Catholic Church is "one" in a better sense? That
it has no divisions, no factions, no arguments? Come on; the Reformation was
a whopping great big split in the Catholic Church, and the fact that after it
happened some of the people stopped being called Catholics doesn't alter the
fact. 

> 
> Finally, Wolfgang writes:
> 
> >> It seems to be safer outside the Catholic Church than inside! ;-)
> 
> I'm not sure I find that especially humorous.  "Safety" isn't a
> criterion the Bible recommends for Christians; the Bible says that
> whoever seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his
> live for Christ's sake will save it.  We seek His Truth and Grace, not
> our safety.

Here, however, I can wholeheartedly agree with you. 

-- 
Gareth McCaughan     Dept. of Pure Mathematics & Mathematical Statistics,
gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk  Cambridge University, England.    [Research student]
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU