The Apostolic Dialogue With Catholics 1

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> As an Apostolic who welcomes the opportunity for dialogue with Catholics
> and who eagerly participates in such dialogues, Bishop Smith's article
> raised many questions and created grave concerns.  Can one be an
> Apostolic and receive others as Christians?  Can one be an Apostolic and
> participate in ecumenical forums where the Christian faith is
> discussed?  Can one be an Apostolic and not embrace Fundamentalist
> theology and Common Sense Philosophy?  Is it really "Fatal Progress" to
> be Apostolic, ecumenical, and give the Apostolic faith a contemporary
> expression?  Although I have raised and answered these questions in the
> Higher-Fire forum before, I would like to address them again in
> interaction with Bishop Smith's article.
>
Bro. Steve:

As you know, I'm one for discussion and an academic understanding of God.
"Study to show thyself approved." However, when the issue of ecumenical
discussion comes up, there is a problem inherent to the concept that causes
me to be reluctant to pursue it. I'll try to outline this succinctly.

Whether one is for or against an ecumenical approach toward other
denominations, one cannot express that without begging the question. For
example, your question, "Can one be an Apostolic and participate in
ecumenical forums where the Christian faith is discussed?" begs the question
by assuming that what is being discussed there is part of the Christian
faith. The Bishop's comments, on the other hand, beg the question by asking
if one wishes to "compromise" the truth. Both question end up being as
pleasant as "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

Also, the concept of coming together in dialogue to find common ground is
misleading. Groups that come together already presume common ground else
they would not do so. Unfortunately one is forced in the  course of such
dialogue to relegate the uniqueness of one's faith to the realm of the
peripheral in order for the common ground to be focused on. Let's use Luther
as an example. His insistance that the church had no treasury of merit from
which it could draw set him at odds with the HRCC. There was no room for
dialogue because this question was felt to be tied to the core issues of
salvation (i.e. what role did the church play in salvation/was it a channel
of God's grace). The possibility of Catholic/Lutheran dialogue has only been
made possible by those who hold views in opposition to their organization or
who feel that such beliefs are peripheral and not necessary to have the
"core" of the Christian faith.

This leads to a "lowest common denominator" approach. The question to be
asked of such an approach is "Where do we stop?" For example, do we
fellowship with trinitarian Pentecostals since we share a common belief in
the Baptism of the Holy Ghost? How about fellowship with Fundamentalists
since we accept the nine fundamentals? How about with evangelicals since we
all accept the necessity of a definite salvation experience? Do we open the
circle wider and say we are in fellowship with mainline denominations also
since we all claim the Bible as an authoritative book for our faith? A
little wider and we can admit Jews and Moslems since we are all monotheists.
Or do we also accept animists and hindus since we all acknowledge a
spiritual reality in the world as opposed to a secular materialist
viewpoint. How low do we choose to set the bar? Conferences have been
convened in the name of ecumenical dialogue in the last 30 years which have
embraced each of these circles of fellowship.

I apreciated your comment about touching others through their observation of
an Apostolic service. However, in order to have an authentic Apostolic
service, one requires liberal (pun intended) doses of Apostolic
distinctives, not just a "bare minimum."

So while I engage in discussions with several individuals and groups on the
Bible, God, etc, I don't feel that it is appropriate tocompromise my
personal beliefs on salvation in order to find "common ground" for us to
share. Where there are areas we can walk together I'm agreed to do so, but
when that is not possible, I prefer to trod "holy ground" ove the common
variety any day.

In Christ,

Frank Vandenburg