Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are...That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. - John 17:11b, 21
Showing posts with label The Great Apostasy (RCC view). Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Great Apostasy (RCC view). Show all posts
Whilst recently engaged in online research, I discovered a
fascinating contribution on the issue of “the Great Apostasy” from a Catholic
perspective. The work is 263 pages in length, and is appropriately titled, The
Great Apostasy. A free PDF copy can be downloaded via THIS LINK.
This book drew me in from the beginning, and apart from
checking a number of the sources referenced within its pages for accuracy, I
literally could not stop reading it. It has me deeply reflecting on the
possibility that I may have misunderstood the very nature of what “the Great
Apostasy" entails.
The book is a must read for folk who are of the
opinion that we may be living in the eschatology period which immediately
precedes the second coming of our Lord. I also suspect it might change the
minds of some who are not of that opinion, but take the time to read and
reflect on its contents—I am eagerly looking forward to dialogue with those who
do so.
The
Apostasy That Wasn't was published back in 2015, and though I own, and have
read Bennett's earlier work, Four Witnesses: The Early Church in Her Own
Words (link),
I did not become aware of The Apostasy That Wasn't until November 2018,
whilst I was engaged in research for my Unity and the Christian Church series.
The
Apostasy That Wasn't is fairly unique in that it is a multi-dimensional
contribution. In one sense, it is in part a more traditional historical work;
in another, it is a historical narrative with some speculative material; and
lastly, it has apologetic elements. The historical aspect of the book primarily
covers a period of history from Diocletian's persecution (303 A.D.) through
first Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (381 A. D.), though it also touches
on certain events in the third century prior to Diocletian's persecution. The more traditional historical part takes it's form in extensive quotations from the extant
works of ancient Christian historians. The historical narrative comes via the
use of a number of historical persons in the period being covered. As for the
apologetic dimension of the book, it is a defense of the historic Catholic
Church against the claims advanced by a number of sects that this historic
Catholic Church became apostate. In the introduction (pages 13-27), some of the
sects he mentions include: Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, Seventh-day
Adventists, The Church of God of Prophecy, and Bennett's former "Baptist
church".
The
balance between the three aforementioned dimensions is quite good—keeping in
mind that the book is not an in depth historical treatment—with the flow of the
book making it very readable. (But with that said, I found the interaction
between the footnotes and endnotes to be a bit cumbersome at times.) Bennett's
narrative format 'brings to life' a number of key historical figures—e.g.
Anthony of the Desert, Athanasius, emperors Constantine and Julian (the
Apostate), Basil the Great—prompting one to engage in more extensive research
via the extant, ancient sources provided in the footnotes and endnotes.
I
suspect a number of AF'sreaders would benefit from reading this engaging
contribution. For those folk who have some interest in the topic, but do not
wish to obtain book, I recommend the following YouTube video:
The Reformers unequivocally rejected the teaching authority of the Roman Catholic Church. This left open the question of who should interpret Scripture. The Reformation was not a struggle for the right of private judgement. The Reformers feared private judgement almost as much as did the Catholics and were not slow to attack it in its Anabaptist manifestation. The Reformation principle was not private judgement but the perspicuity of the Scriptures. Scripture was ‘sui ipsius interpres’ and the simple principle of interpreting individual passages by the whole was to lead to unanimity in understanding. This came close to creating anew the infallible church…It was this belief in the clarity of Scripture that made the early disputes between Protestants so fierce. This theory seemed plausible while the majority of Protestants held to Lutheran or Calvinist orthodoxy but the seventeenth century saw the beginning of the erosion of these monopolies. But even in 1530 Casper Schwenckfeld could cynically note that ‘the Papists damn the Lutherans; the Lutherans damn the Zwinglians; the Zwinglians damn the Anabaptists and the Anabaptists damn all others.’ By the end of the seventeenth century many others saw that it was not possible on the basis of Scripture alone to build up a detailed orthodoxy commanding general assent. (A.N.S. Lane, “Scripture, Tradition and Church: An Historical Survey”, Vox Evangelica, Volume IX – 1975, pp. 44, 45 – bold emphasis mine.) [http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/vox/vol09/scripture_lane.pdf]
