The Church vs. Sectarianism
A quote found in a discussion group of Evangelicals, which apparently went unchallenged:
"In apologetics, an infallible sign of a cult is that they believe they're the only true church."
I wonder if the man who posted this statement ever stopped to consider that the apostolic church had what he calls "an infallible sign of a cult." Certainly the apostles considered theirs to be the one true church and wouldn't have accepted the modern concept of denominationalism, which is essentially institutionalized schism. It is absurd to think, just because they have a common profession on a few "essential" points, that hundreds of independent organizations teaching a wide array of differing and conflicting doctrines can all comprise one church.
I believe that one of the marks of a false church is that they consider themselves to be just another denomination among a number of equally legitimate denominations. Now it may be that a certain group will falsely claim to be the true church, but it doesn't follow that there is no group which can rightly make that claim, and it is certain that those groups which don't have the convictions to make that claim, cannot be the true church.
As Charles P. Krauth (1800's) put it:
"No particular Church has, on its own showing, a right to existence, except as it believes itself to be the most perfect form of Christianity, the form which of right should and will be universal. No Church has a right to a part which does not claim that to it should belong the whole. That communion confesses itself a sect which aims at no more than abiding as one of a number of equally legitimated bodies. That communion which does not believe in the certainty of the ultimate acceptance of its principles in the whole world has not the heart of a true Church. That which claims to be Catholic de facto claims to be Universal de jure."
"In apologetics, an infallible sign of a cult is that they believe they're the only true church."
I wonder if the man who posted this statement ever stopped to consider that the apostolic church had what he calls "an infallible sign of a cult." Certainly the apostles considered theirs to be the one true church and wouldn't have accepted the modern concept of denominationalism, which is essentially institutionalized schism. It is absurd to think, just because they have a common profession on a few "essential" points, that hundreds of independent organizations teaching a wide array of differing and conflicting doctrines can all comprise one church.
I believe that one of the marks of a false church is that they consider themselves to be just another denomination among a number of equally legitimate denominations. Now it may be that a certain group will falsely claim to be the true church, but it doesn't follow that there is no group which can rightly make that claim, and it is certain that those groups which don't have the convictions to make that claim, cannot be the true church.
As Charles P. Krauth (1800's) put it:
"No particular Church has, on its own showing, a right to existence, except as it believes itself to be the most perfect form of Christianity, the form which of right should and will be universal. No Church has a right to a part which does not claim that to it should belong the whole. That communion confesses itself a sect which aims at no more than abiding as one of a number of equally legitimated bodies. That communion which does not believe in the certainty of the ultimate acceptance of its principles in the whole world has not the heart of a true Church. That which claims to be Catholic de facto claims to be Universal de jure."
posted by Stuart DiNenno at 11/15/2004 02:09:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home