Answering a Meme About Catholic and Orthodox

As I recommended a resource by Bible.ca on the Scopes trial, it should be made clear I don't recommend all their material.

For instance, not this meme:



It is true both claim to be all the five items, meaning both Catholics and Orthodox are making the same claim as rival claimants, but the reason Bible.ca add a "false" after each claim are false reasons.

So, both claim to be ...

Claim : 1. The only true church founded by Jesus Christ

"False"

Orthodox and Catholic split to "break communion" in AD 1054 because "Rome" introduced instrumental music and sprinkling for baptism.

Answer

This doesn't make the claim untrue for either one of them, it just means it can't be true for both.

One could still be the one founded by Jesus Christ, the other one be the one founded by the split. Actually, there are three more confessions making such a claim : Monophysites of Egypt and Ethiopia, Monophysites of Armenia (who are not the same Monophysites as the Copts, but slightly different) and Nestorians or Assyrians. So, one cannot say one of them must be. Rather, one of the five, not just above two, must be so.

Claim : 2. The only Church that gave the world the Bible

"False"

All Bible books were in full circulation and used in the Church by AD 100.

Answer

The claim obviously involves the claim of being the Church which existed in AD 100. All five of the confessions make this claim (either claim to be, or to be part of), and all five of them honour the man who was Pope of Rome that year as a saint - that was Pope St. Evaristus, from 99 to 105.

Also, not all books of the NT were accepted by all of the Churches as canonic until last quarter of 4th C. You had eastern churches (notably Laodicea) which did not accept Apocalypse and you had western churches who were hesitant about some other book.

Claim : 3. The only Church that has all the Sacraments instituted by Christ.

"False"

"Confirmation" and "Holy Orders" are not found in the New Testament.

Answer

They are. Confirmation in Acts 8, about Samarians needing a laying on of hands after Baptism, and just after Simon Magus is asking for the orders which the Apostles had and Philippus lacked, namely episcopal orders making it possible to confirm others (Orthodox could say even priests culd do so, since Philippus was only a deacon).

Also, the Greek word for giving holy orders is cheirotonein, which appears more than once in the NT. In the letters to Timothy it is clear it cannot mean the Classical meaning of "raising hands" in vote for someone. It is clear it must mean a gesture made by the one who single handed appoints someone as part of what therefore must be considered as a kind of clergy.

Claim : 4. The only Church whose leaders trace authority to Christ & Apostles

"False"

"In AD 595 Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople John IV was the first man to ever claim to be "universal bishop" (Pope). Gregory I, Patriarch of Rome says the new Holy Order of Pope is a sign "the antichrist is near" and calls "Universal Bishop" a "proud and profane title" and equates John IV's to the devil himself. In AD 606 Boniface III, Bishop of Rome, is the first Catholic" to claim to be "Pope"

Answer

Even if the accusation against papacy were true, this leaves out that one of the five confessions traces its bishops back to the Apostles, all of them do in a series of ordinations, or as it is called when a bishop is given his orders, consecrations, and one of them does so licitly, even if up to four others do so by a kind of robbery, as it would have been robbery to give episcopal consecration or even priestly ordination to Simon Magus.

However, the story as told is even skewed. It gives the impression that the claim is meant for exactly one authority bearer in each camp, Pope and Ecumenic Patriarch, leaving out bishops, when in fact the Orthodox usually have bishops only as this claim with Ecumenic Patriarch as a kind of administrational umpire between the bishops on items of less than purely spiritual importance.

Also, we have evidence that Popes well before Boniface III in fact were acting as if bishops over not just Rome but all the Church.

England traces its Catholic Hierarchy back to St Augustine of Canterbury, who was sent by the same Pope St. Gregory I.

Oh, wait, he was not sent by a neighbouring bishop in a neighbouring Christian country, as closests to the issue? No, he was sent by the Pope. The bishop of Rome acted as if he was responsible for Anglo-Saxon England getting a missionary - which he was.

Claim : 5. The only true "universal" Church on earth with a unified doctrine

Here

I will diverge from the format and break the "false" statement into two and answer each part.

"False"

Orthodox, Catholic and Jehovah's Witness all achieve "unity" by top-to-bottom decree yet differ significantly with each other on many key doctrines. ...

Answer

Unlike Catholic, Orthodox, Copts, Armenians, Assyrians, the Watchtower society has no claim to be the true Church. Since it was obviously not around since AD 33. However, if each of the other five does make the claim and they differ between them, this means only one of the five can be the genuine deal. It doesn't mean all of the five have to be fake.*

Also, you have several branches of Protestantism which are similarly diverging from each other while replacing the claim with the claim of basing doctrine on "Bible alone" without any at least universal top-to-bottom decrees. So, the argument is clearly no good for Protestantism.

"False"

... These doctrines are not found in the Bible : infant baptism, sprinkling instead of immersion, unmarried bishops, instrumental music. Mary died a virgin, praying to any dead humans including Mary, the Rosary, annual celebration the birth or death of Christ.

Answer

Apart from sprinkling replacing immersion in some cases and apart from the specific prayers of the Rosary, these doctrines or disciplines are common between the five confessions which could make a claim.

These are not really any cases in point for the previous part of the "false" answer.

Moreover, they are also no answer to the claim, unless you argue that the "true" part in "true universal" precludes false doctrines or universally accepted disciplines, as it does, and that any doctrine or discipline not directly found in the Bible is ipso facto false - which is a version of the sola scriptura heresy which Catholics condemned at Trent and which Orthodox condemned in the Councils of Jerusalem and Iasi, as also in the Sigillia which mainly targetted Catholics, a bit later (a sigillion by a Ecumenic Patriarch is "roughly equivalent" to a Papal bull : both mean a document sealed by the authority bearer's actual seal). Sigillion of 1583 point 7 targets all not following Orthodox customs and sigillion of 1756 in its entirety targets the use of Gregorian instead of Julian calendar : it says you must celebrate Easter with the Eastern Orthodox and you most celebrate Christmas when Julian, not Gregorian calendar has December 25. This is also said in point 7 of 1583.

So, while true universal Church means no false doctrine or discipline, the appeal to Bible alone clearly is a false either doctrine or discipline - not a true one on which to judge such a claim.

See also : Creation vs. Evolution : Lying for Darwin
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2018/09/lying-for-darwin.html

* Correction inserted from yesterdays version. See comment.