A Little Summary on the Authority of the Church

[The reaction to Pam's January 1999 letter of her conversion to Catholicism stirred up signifiant resentment, anger, and misunderstanding among our friends and relatives. It was as if we had become Democrat and donned their historic mantel of slavery. She wrote this letter in response. It didn't help. Prejudices run deep.]

Pamela Sue Williams

July, 1999

All of you know about the Matthew 18: 15-18 passage telling believers how to handle disputes among us. (Confront the person in private. Bring others with you. Take the matter to the Church). So, what is the final authority? The Church is. The Church has the final say, not man’s opinions. Matthew 18 doesn’t say, search the scripture about this matter, because the dispute many times is over scripture itself and what it means, what it teaches. Likewise, we know that when 2 or 3 are gathered in Christ’s name, He is there in the midst of us. But what if the 2 or 3 disagree? Matthew 18 does not say if you disagree, start your own church (as 26,000 denominations have done). It says take it to the Church! And whoever does not listen to the Church’s decision should be cast out of the Christian community/the Church.

All of you know that Protestant believers hold that Scripture alone is where we derive Truth from God (Sola Scriptura). When we believe that, we often go church hopping. (Maybe some of you have been there. I have.) Why do we do that? Because we are looking for a church that agrees with us. So, what is the final authority? We are. But our intellect cannot be the final authority on God. 

"Oh," but you say, "it’s not me alone. It’s the Holy Spirit leading me into all truth, as the scripture says." (I’ve said it myself in defense of Sola Scriptura). But does scripture say that we (you and I) have the final say? No, it says that the Church has the final say; the Church that Christ established and gave authority to through Peter and the Apostles. Again, if we say that we and scripture alone are the final authority (with the Holy Spirit) we end up having to try to find a church that agrees with us, and I never found one I agreed with on every doctrine, so does that tell me I should start a church of my own and make that 26,001?or stay in a church I agree with on the majority of doctrines and ignore the ones I don’t agree with? (I did that a lot). Or do I investigate the Church Christ established and discover what it really teaches? I was encouraged by Stan to do the latter, and may I please tell you one thing I learned that clears up 1,000 other issues for me about the Church? It has to do with the authority of the Catholic Church.

When the first heresy came up in the early Church (Acts 15) what did they do? This was when a deacon [according to writings of the early Church Fathers, his name was Nicholas, who is mentioned in the original list of deacons in Acts 6 as a convert to Judaism] at Antioch was teaching that Gentiles who became Christians had to be obedient to Old Testament law and be circumcised! They followed the steps of Matthew 18! The matter had been brought to Paul and Barnabas, but they could not resolve it, so they brought it to the Church, the apostles and elders in Jerusalem at that time. There was much debate over the issue until Peter stood up and declared his answer, and then the whole crowd fell silent, held their peace, they shut up. The rest of the discourse is the other leaders (Paul, Barnabas, and James) echoing Peter’s decision and/or implementing the decision made. Peter’s word settled the dispute, and circumcision was never brought up again.

Also, in Acts 11:18 after hearing Peter on the issue of the gospel being taken to the Gentiles, the leaders of the Church held their peace, stopped objecting, and glorified God. The dispute was settled.

Later, in 451 AD, when heresy arose that Christ had only a divine nature, the matter was brought to the Church. When Pope Leo the Great declared that the teaching of the Church was Christ is one person with two natures, wholly human and wholly divine, the Fathers of the Council erupted with joy and said, "Peter has spoken through Leo, the question is settled," because Peter spoke for Christ… and I’ll bet you never knew where that particular doctrine that Protestants still hold (and many others, including the Trinity, that are not explicitly spelled out in scripture) came from…. from decisions over heretical teachings that the Church with its authority from Christ, had to take a stand on to declare what was Truth.

That’s the true meaning of the scripture "…and the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth."…the way Christ established it should be done, that is through the Authority of the Church. In Acts 15:28, when the Early Church communicated its decision on circumcision, their statement was, "It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us (the Apostles/the magisterium of the Church)…" And so, even today, the Holy Spirit speaks through the magisterium of the Church, because the Pope (with the Council of Bishops--like Peter and the Apostles) speaks with the authority of Christ.

Now, really, like in 451 AD, if someone had come to you with the question about Jesus’ divinity and humanity (before you knew the answer of the Holy Spirit), what would you have said? And even if you did have the right answer, why should anyone listen to you or to me? We were not given authority by Christ to say what the Holy Spirit is saying to the Church. The Keys of authority were given uniquely to Peter, just like a king would delegate authority to his Prime Minister! We know that Jesus is the King (Rev. 2:4). And we know that He delegated His authority to carry on His work to His Church… and uniquely to Peter (Matt. 16:15-18--You, referring to Peter, is used 7 times in this passage, and it is the personal pronoun being used, not collective). So, Peter is Christ’s Prime Minister or Pope, and on matters of Church doctrine/Truth, he is infallible, because he speaks for Christ.

When I believe that, the rest is easy, because if I believe that Christ delegated his authority to Peter and the Apostles, and upon them He built His Church, then when the Church speaks, it is the Word of God on the matter. My intellect is now in submission to the authority of Jesus Christ as established in His Church. I am no longer looking for a church to agree with me. I am seeking to agree with His Church! As a Catholic, I am not free to disagree with even one of the disciplines of the Church just because I do not like them. The Church has the Word of Christ on all matters of faith and morals, so I can happily obey, and there is freedom and peace/resolution in this kind of obedience. There is also humility to think that I don’t have all the proper interpretation on scripture that I thought I once had and that I must become like a little child and learn. …But isn’t that what Christ asks us to become to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?

Dear Ones...we're Catholic!

[An open letter from Pam to our friends and relatives after her conversion to Catholicism. "Unhappy" was not an accurate description of their reaction.]

Pamela Sue Williams

January 4, 1999

Dear Ones,

I have hesitated to write this, because I know how opposed I was to hearing Stan’s decision to do this only a year ago. I also know that some of you will be unhappy when I tell you about my own decision. The Catholic church has not been perfect, and it may have needed protesting against in times past for its various wrong practices. But I have come to see, over this past year, that it is the church that Jesus established, and that despite its wayward practices of the middle ages, (and they were dark indeed) it has remained doctrinally solid these 2,000 years.

The problem in most cases, where there is disagreement between Protestants and Catholics, has been in communication of beliefs and doctrines. Many supposed differences are really misunderstandings or misinformed rumor. Once I read and heard the truth about what they believe, I could not deny that the Catholic church is still the true church Christ established. Catholics call Protestants their "separated brethren," but we are both Christians, and God wants His church to be united. Perhaps our separation was justified for awhile as the Catholic church went through some dark times, but today it is back on track. Plus, it has never varied from its historical doctrines dating back to the Apostles. (What we have seen changes in have been practices.)

One beautiful doctrine Catholics believe in is the "communion of saints,"… those who have passed out of this world as well as those of us who remain. All the saints are alive,… just not all in this world. The Catholic church practices communion with these saints who have died but are still alive in Christ. I have come to see this as a beautiful thing that is real and true to me.

I do not have a problem with any of the other doctrines I used to think separated us either. And I especially find an answer to the scriptures regarding Jesus’ emphasis on being the true bread, and if anyone does not eat of his flesh and drink of his blood, he cannot have eternal life (John 6:30-60). For me, this can only be settled by the Mass, where through the Prayer of blessing by Christ from the Priest (not unlike the Jewish Priests sacrificing the lamb and sprinkling its blood), the bread becomes Christ’s body and the wine becomes his blood for us to consume as the Lamb of God, sacrificed for our sins.

I have thought about this long and hard and I have had many appointments with Father Cronk at St. James Church in Novi. I have read and prayed, argued with Stan, cried, and had Catholic friends over and out to dinner to probe them with questions. After all was said and done, at the risk of offending some of my Protestant friends and family, I have come to the decision that I’d be wrong not to become Catholic. I hope you will not see this decision as a betrayal or a short-sighted move. I’d like you to consider it as a step in my Christian walk that has opened up new doors to bring me even closer to the God I have always loved and served since I accepted Jesus as my Savior when I was eight years old.

I am truly thankful for the godly upbringing I received and for the Protestant ways I hold dear. They are not diminished or compromised by becoming Catholic. In fact, they are enhanced and expanded to include the early church Traditions established by the Apostles.

I know many of you will not understand (I know I wouldn’t have a year ago), and so I want you to know I will be glad to answer any questions I may have raised in your mind. In the meantime, if you are able and willing, you may join me on Saturday, January 23, at 6:00pm (or when 5:00 Mass is over) at St. James Church on 10 Mile (between Taft and Beck), as I receive the Sacrament of Baptism and Confirmation at that time into the Catholic church. I will not be offended if you choose not to come. I just want you to know when and where the event will take place.

I love you all and have benefited greatly from your kind notes of love and encouragement and your many prayers during my battle with cancer. My treatments are nearly done… one more month to go of 22 radiations. I am thankful for God’s wake-up call to me, to see some old issues in a new light while passing through the valley of the shadow of death. Soon I will be ready to go back to work, stronger for all I have been through, physically and spiritually. I am so thankful to all of you for your support, and hope we can continue to support one another in our journey here below.

Love,
Pam Williams

P.S. As I added personal messages onto the real paper/regular mail letters I mailed yesterday to people not hooked up to E-Mail, one thing kept coming to mind, so I will add it here.
I really wish that all of Christ’s Church would come together — Protestants and Catholics alike!

I do hope this letter helps you to understand my own reason for embracing something that used to seem so foreign. I don’t expect it will in most cases, as it took me over a year, and I had time to study it, …but I wanted to try.

Reason vs. Prayer

A Second Look at

Personal Integrity and the Plight of Christianity

Copyright 1996 Stan Williams
All Rights Reserved

Tonight, as my family conversed at dinner, we shared a number of anecdotes which underscore why many rational people want nothing to do with Christianity. After a few stories, it’s clear why Christianity is so often demeaned in our society: Individual Christians too often lack the ability to demonstrate accountability for their actions. Our stories this night demonstrate how Christians, at times, refuse to admit their mistakes and instead explain events in terms of Scripture, God’s will, or prayer —subjects too hallowed to debate. Such deflections of responsibility inhibit personal and global evangelism and the full development of God’s kingdom here on earth.

Two months ago one of my daughters applied to a Christian missionary school and as requested submitted a medical report and requested three acquaintances to complete character reference forms and mail them into the school. Two weeks after she believed everything had been mailed to the school by the doctor and the acquaintances, she called the admissions office to confirm the forms had been received; and she called nearly every week thereafter. Inevitably, she was told that the medical report and the reference forms had not yet arrived. Finally, she called those that had filled out the reference forms and discovered that all the forms had, in fact, been mailed to the admissions office over a month earlier. She then decided to make a polite pest of herself to the admissions office. Finally, after the third call in 30 minutes, the misfiled forms were found. They had been there for over a month. What was the admission office’s response? Did they admit they were negligent, or that they needed to fix their system for tracking incoming forms? No. Instead they quoted a Bible verse to my daughter suggesting that she needed to “wait on the Lord.” Hmm? Did God misfile the forms? I doubt it. Instead, it appears we were waiting on human error to be discovered. From that event, my daughter learned what many non-Christians already know: When Christians make mistakes they often pass it off, not as a mistake or an error in need of correction, but rather as God’s sovereign will over their lives. Phooey! Such talk demonstrates irresponsibility; it excuses Christians from personal responsibility, and God is blamed, through a back-handed compliment. Such disavowal of responsibility, to the non-Christian, is a sign of dishonesty, . . . even stupidity. Few people want to be associated with individuals who blame God for their own mistakes.

A similar event occurred to my other daughter when she applied to a respected Christian liberal arts college several years earlier. In that situation a character reference form was misplaced as well. She had met all the minimum requirements for admission and had done so on time. When the form could not be found she was told that she had missed the deadline and her request for admission would be held up and possibly denied. Some Christians close to her suggested that perhaps this was God “closing the door.” “It must be God’s will, that she not go” to this particular Christian school. What irked me, and what turns off many non-Christians, is that such an attitude is too gracious for the situation — it doesn’t allow for human incompetence. As it turned out the forms were submitted on time but had somehow been misplaced in the Financial Aid office. When we insisted they look for them, they discovered their error and our daughter was admitted. (She graduated with honors four yeas later, by the way.) But, again, what was human error was described as “God’s will.” When Christians start admitting their faults and stop blaming God, perhaps non-Christians will begin to see the Christian life as one filled with credibility and honesty. What a novel idea.

Another example that made national headlines was the New Era Foundation debacle, where a supposedly philanthropic organization was uncovered as nothing more than a pyramid scam. A number of Christians associated with the duped institutions were not so easily fooled. Their advice, that something “too good to be true” was probably just that, was not heeded. Greed got in the way, and many reputable Christian organizations fell for the get-rich-scheme, invested millions and lost. When the scheme collapsed and our church’s school lost hundreds of thousands of dollars, our pastor delivered a sermon that disavowed him and the elders from any responsibility and proclaimed that it had all happened due to God’s will and His leading of our lives in ways we do not understand. Not! Instead of admitting their mistake and greed, they placed their misjudgment at the feet of God and said to the world, “God’s will is never wrong even if we don’t understand it.” What they refused to admit is what non-Christians readily know — God doesn’t make mistakes, humans (even smart ones) often do. Yes, God’s sovereign will was involved but not like our pastor and the editor of a major Christian publication concluded. Let’s face it, smart people can make stupid decisions. And when stupid decisions are made God’s sovereign will says there will be dire consequences. And that’s just what happened. When thinking, non-Christians saw how the church responded to this, with claims that God’s will was involved, some thought correctly: “If Christians are that stupid, then they must be worshipping the wrong God.” No wonder many people cast off Christianity.

The apologist Hugh Ross, in a recent newsletter, wrote about what he perceives as the reason for the difficulty Christian evangelism faces in Japan. He discovered, much to his chagrin, that some Christian missionaries fiercely oppose rational explanations of God’s creation (e.g. intelligent design and natural processes versus instantaneous overnight creation). This serves “only to expose one reason the Japanese people have been so closed to the Christian faith — it doesn’t seem rational to them.”[1] Why should they embrace Christianity and deny what they see in creation? Obviously, to the Japanese at least, the Christian God isn’t the God of the universe.

Praying for things instead of using common sense seems also to be a common malady affecting Christians. My daughter, the missionary to be, attended a Christian liberal arts college for two years before dorm life became intolerable and she moved out. Not the sole reasons, but definitely a contributor to her dorm life problems, was the moral mess her roommates those two years turned out to be. In both cases sexual immorality was afoot. Both girls, two different years, let their studies slide and became pregnant, dropping out of school. Beforehand, we had earnestly requested that the room selection committee find students with good study habits as role models for our daughter. How did the school do that? Those matching roommates "...prayed over the dorm rooming lists” before assignments were made. Who was to argue with such “spirituality” without sounding anti-Christian? In this case, was prayer an excuse for not using good hard work and close examination of transcripts and personal reference forms? Many non-Christians are turned off by our typical response, “I’ll pray for you.” What the non-Christian may in fact need is some good hard work and labor of love on our part. Prayer has its place, but it is no replacement for common sense and, a little research, and hard work. Non-Christians know that, why don’t Christians?

For most of my upbringing I’ve been taught the time honored Christian tradition of praying before an event in which I’ve had some leadership responsibility. That seems reasonable, and I still do it. The more critical the event, the more I pray. But, too often what goes hand-in-hand with such prayers is a lack of proper preparation for the event itself. My experience is that Christians pray too much and prepare too little. If something isn’t quite right I’ve seen graciousness and prayer take over, leaving behind mediocrity and an embarrassing witness. Rather than learning the skills necessary for a job, the typical Christian response is one of prayer and Bible study, as if prayer and Bible study were sufficient replacements for skill development and knowledge.

Recently, a Christian we know applied for a job for which she was not fully qualified by state standards. Yet, came the defense: “God is in this and we should pray that she gets the job.” Luckily for the church’s reputation, the person was rejected. Yet some Christians believe that Christians deserve certain positions simply because they are Christians. Such thinking is silly if not arrogant. Being a Christian has absolutely nothing to do with knowledge, skill or ability. At its root, being a Christian simply means we are “forgiven.” When someone fails to prepare for a particular goal and instead prays for it, they give evidence that they are lazy stewards or worse yet arrogant fools. They are like the servant in Christ’s parable who buried his talents in the ground afraid they would be lost. Such Christians produce insufficient return on God’s investment and risk being cast into outer darkness. Non-Christians recognize such laziness and arrogance, why don’t Christians see it? When Christians are honest about the need to develop their gifts perhaps the Christian life might have more attraction to non-Christians who too are concerned with honesty and excellence.

I am not the only one that feels such angst at Christians' embrace of incompetence, arrogance, laziness, and mediocrity. Annie Dillard in Holy the Firm reflects on the immensity of God’s grace when a “wretched singer” visited her island church and to “faltering accompaniment” sang an entirely secular song. Dillard reflects: “nothing could more surely convince me of God’s unending mercy that the continued existence on earth of the church.”[2]. Franky Schaeffer in Addicted to Mediocrity focuses on Evangelical Christianity's rejection of the artistic talents of so many and the elevation of spiritual “charlatanism and buffoonery” of church leaders.[3] Hugh Ross laments the rejection of rational thinking that turns many away from Christianity, the most rational of “faiths.”[4] Charles Colson in The Bodyrecounts how Amy Grant was lambasted by Evangelical Christians because she crossed over to the secular music industry and supposedly lost her “Christian message.”[5] Never mind that she had suddenly become salt and light in a dark and desperately needing industry. Speaking of “salt and light” I can not forget Bob Briner who in Roaring Lambs reminds Christian Colleges that their job is to develop young minds and not involve students in so many “Christian” ministries that they have “trouble finding time to study.”[6]

That reminds me of a dear young man rooming across the hall from me in a Christian College as a freshman. Jack (not his real name) was our floor chaplain. He was smart and articulate. Unfortunately, Jack was “such a committed Christian” that he spent most of his time in Bible study and prayer. The result? Despite great potential he flunked several classes for failing to turn in work and during the second semester had a nervous breakdown forcing him to drop out of school.

Finally, Eugene Peterson, translator of The Message has said, “One of the devil’s finest pieces of work is getting people to spend three nights a week in Bible studies”[7] implying that Christians are so heavenly minded they are no earthly good. The voices are out there crying in the Christian wilderness for personal integrity and accountability. Is anyone listening?

When are we as Christians going to wake up and start using common sense and prayer instead of prayer alone; when will we embrace rational thinking and God’s sovereignty instead of blaming God’s sovereignty alone; and when will we pursue knowledge, skill building and the Bible instead of just Bible study? When will we, as the church, wake up and pursue excellence and reject arrogance? When will we as Christians again be worthy of being society’s role model as God intended? I hope very, very soon. Until then, many non-Christians would rather use the rational mind God gave them and accept their share of responsibility for mistakes and blunders. When Christianity rises to that level of accountability, then maybe pagans will take a second look.

---

[1] Hugh Ross, Newsletter (Pasadena, CA: Reasons to Believe, February 1996), 1.

[2] Annie Dillard, Holy the Firm (New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1977), 58-59.

[3] Franky Schaeffer, Addicted to Mediocrity (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1981), 75.

[4] Hugh Ross, Creation and Time (Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress, 1994), 8-15.

[5] Charles Colson, The Body (Dallas, TX: Word, 1992), 375-376.

[6] Bob Briner, Roaring Lambs (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993), 157.

[7] Michael Cusick, “A Conversation with Eugene Peterson,” The Mars Hill Review, 3 (Fall 1995), 83.