If Only One True Church, Where Is It?

You are here

If Only One True Church, Where Is It?

Login or Create an Account

With a UCG.org account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up

×

Pope Benedict firmly believes that the Catholic Church is the only true church and he boldly said so recently. "For the second time in a week, Pope Benedict XVI has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, reasserting the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church and saying other Christian communities were either defective or not true churches" (From Associated Press via Fox News.Com, July 10, 2007; Title: Pope: Other Christian Denominations Not True Churches). These strong words raised the ire of Protestant and other Christian leaders around the world.

Non-Catholic Christian leaders were deeply offended over the Pope's recent comments, taken from a document he wrote back in 2000, when he was a Cardinal. They claim that he is eroding or undermining nearly a half century of ecumenism. "It makes us question the seriousness with which the Roman Catholic Church takes its dialogues with the Reformed family and other families of the church, said the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, which groups 75 million Reformed Christians in 214 churches in 107 countries" (ibid.). To some Catholics and many Protestants, the ecumenical movement was greatly enhanced by Vatican II, the 1962-65 meetings that began a procedure to modernize the church.

Why would the Pope use such seemingly demeaning language? Some observers think that Pope Benedict feels some Catholic liberals have advanced erroneous interpretations of Vatican II, offering encouragement for some to depart from the ancient and more rigid traditions of the Catholic Church.

Others surmise that "it could be a question of internal church politics, or that the Congregation was sending a message to certain theologians it did not want to single out" (ibid.). "In fact, the only theologian cited by name in the [2000] document for having spawned erroneous interpretations of ecumenism was Leonardo Boff, the Brazilian who was a target of the former Cardinal Ratzinger's crackdown on liberation theology in the 1980s" (ibid.). If this is so, a warning shot across the bow might appear to be sufficient for other wandering ships at sea.

The top Protestant cleric in Germany, the Lutheran Bishop Wolfgang Huber, indicated that the Pope could have worded his comments better, making them more acceptable. However, if you read Huber's opposition to the Pope's strong words, that other Christian groups aren't really true Christians, you come away feeling that Huber watered down this highly inflammatory issue.

Yet, without reservation, the Pope directly stated other Christian denominations were merely ecclesial communities that did not have the necessary means of salvation. The necessary means of salvation appears as a code-phrase, indicating that all other churches lacked apostolic succession. Specifically, the document reads, "Christ established here on earth only one Church (ibid.)," and it rests on apostolic succession, beginning with Peter.

Interestingly, there is no hard biblical evidence or even secular proof that Peter ever went to Rome; no matter whether one cites Clement, Dionysius of Corinth, or Origen (Merrill F. Unger, The New Unger's Bible Dictionary, 1988, p. 993). Another point is that since the apostle Paul did go to Rome and preached there for at least two years (Acts 28:30), why did he never mention Peter being in Rome?

This is not at all like Paul. After all, he mentioned lesser, but important biblical luminaries, such as Luke (2 Timothy 4:11), who traveled with Paul (Acts 27:1; "we" includes the author Luke). Good sound reason insists that Paul would have acknowledged Peter, had he been in Rome. Peter did go to Babylon, to the circumcision and to Israelites scattered abroad (1 Peter 1:1).

Remember that when Jesus Christ established the New Testament Church, through the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2), all 12 apostles were in Jerusalem, not Rome. This is the biblical beginning of the true church. The only true church began in Jerusalem, initially made up entirely of converted Jews. After the apostles' conversion on that same remarkable day of Pentecost, some 3,000 Jewish converts were added to the early New Testament Church (Acts 2:41).

What's the answer to this entanglement? Protestants are disappointed. But to Pope Benedict, there is no entanglement. In his thinking there is only one true church, the Catholic Church. But if the great struggles that Christians suffered to bring about a much needed Reformation are to be considered, that thought seems incredible.