Question: “What was the Protestant Reformation?”……Answer: In understanding the history of Protestant Church and the Reformation, it is important to first understand that one of the claims that the Roman Catholic Church makes is that of apostolic succession. This simply means that they claim a unique authority over all other churches and denominations because they claim the line of Roman Catholic Popes back throughout the centuries, all the way to the Apostle Peter. In their view, this gives the Roman Catholic Church a unique authority that supersedes all other denominations or churches. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, this apostolic succession is only "found in the Catholic Church" and no "separate Churches have any valid claim to it."……It is because of this apostolic succession that the Roman Catholic Church claims a unique authority to interpret Scripture and to establish doctrine, as well the claim of having a supreme leader in the Pope who is infallible (without error) when speaking "ex cathedra"-that is, in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians. Therefore, according to the Roman Catholic view, the teaching or traditions of the Roman Catholic Church as they come from the Pope are equally as infallible and authoritative as the Scriptures themselves. This is one of the major differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants and was one of the foundational reasons for the Protestant Reformation.……Of course, the Roman Catholics are not the only ones who try to claim unique authority through apostolic succession or by tracing the roots of their church back to the original apostles. The Eastern Orthodox Church also claims apostolic succession, although their claim is very similar to the Roman Catholic view. The split between Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism did not occur until the "Great Schism" in A.D. 1054. There are also some Protestant denominations or groups that will try to establish a "Trail of Blood" that can be traced back through the centuries to the first century church and the apostles themselves. While these Protestants do not hold to apostolic succession in order to establish the authority of a "Pope" as an infallible leader, they still look to that connection to the early church in at least some small degree to establish the authority of their doctrines and practices.……The problem with any of these attempts to trace a line of succession back to the apostles, whether it is Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestant, is that they all are attempts to derive or support the authority of what they believe and teach from the wrong source, that of some real or perceived connection with the apostles, instead of deriving it from the Word of God. It is important for Christians to realize that direct apostolic succession is not necessary in order for a church or denomination to have authority. God has given and preserved the supreme authority for all matters of faith and practice in His Holy Word, the Bible. Therefore, an individual church's or denomination's authority today does not come through some tie to the first century church and the apostles. Instead, it comes only and directly from the written Word of God. A church or denomination's teachings are authoritative and binding on Christians only if they represent the true meaning and clear teaching of Scripture. This is important in order to understand the connection between Protestantism and the Roman Catholic Church, and the reason that the Protestant Reformation took place.……In regards to the history of Christianity and the claims of apostolic succession, as well as the Roman Catholic Church's claim of being the one true Church with unique authority, it is important that to understand a couple of key points. First, we must realize that even in the days of the apostles and the first century church, false teachers were a significant problem. We know this because warnings against heresies and false teachers are found in all the later New Testament writings. Jesus Himself warned that these false teachers would be like "wolves in sheep's clothing" Matthew 7:15-16 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?and that there would be both "tares and wheat" that would exist together until the day of judgment when He separates the saved from the lost, the true "born again" believer from those that have not truly received Him

Matthew 13:24-30 24 Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared. 27 "The owner's servants came to him and said, ÔÇÿSir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?' 28 " ÔÇÿAn enemy did this,' he replied."The servants asked him, ÔÇÿDo you want us to go and pull them up?' 29 " ÔÇÿNo,' he answered, ÔÇÿbecause while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' "

This is important in understanding church history, because from almost the very beginning false teachers and false teachings have been invading the church and leading people astray. Despite this, there have also been true "born again" believers who held fast to the biblical doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, throughout all ages, even in the darkest period of the dark ages.……The second thing to realize to correctly understand church history is that the word catholic simply means "universal." This is important because in the early Christian writings of the first and second centuries, when the term catholic is used, it is referring to the "universal church" or "body of Christ" that is made up of "born again" believers from every tribe, tongue and nation Revelation 5:9And they sang a new song:"You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.

Revelation 7:9.After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

However, like many other words over time, the word catholic began to take on new meaning, or came to be used in a new sense. Over time, the concept of a "universal" or "catholic" church began to evolve into the concept that all churches formed together one church, not just spiritually, but also visibly, extending throughout the world. This misunderstanding of the nature of the visible church (which always has contained both "wheat and tares") and the invisible church (the body of Christ which is only made up of born again believers) would lead to the concept of a visible Holy Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. It is out of this misunderstanding of the nature of the universal church that the Roman Catholic Church evolved.……Prior to the Constantine's conversion to Christianity in A.D. 315, Christians had been persecuted by the Roman government. With his conversion, Christianity became an allowed religion of the Roman Empire (and later became the official religion), and thus the "visible" Church became joined with the power of the Roman government. This marriage of church and state led to the formation of the Roman Catholic Church, and over time caused the Roman Catholic Church to refine its doctrine and develop its structure in a way that best served the purpose of the Roman government. During this time, opposing the Roman Catholic Church was the same as opposing the Roman government and carried with it severe penalties. If one disagreed with some doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, it was a serious charge that often resulted in excommunication and sometimes even death.……Yet throughout this time of history, there were true "born again" Christians who would rise up and oppose the secularization of the Roman Catholic Church and the perversion of the faith that followed. Through this church-and-state combination, the Roman Catholic Church effectively silenced those who opposed any of its doctrines or practices, and truly became almost a universal church throughout the Roman Empire. There were always pockets of resistance to some of the unbiblical practices and teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, yet they were relatively small and isolated. Prior to the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century, men such as John Wycliffe in England, John Huss in Czechoslovakia, and John of Wessel in Germany had all given their lives for their opposition to some of the unbiblical teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.……The opposition to the Roman Catholic Church and its false teaching came to a head in the sixteenth century, when a Roman Catholic monk named Martin Luther posted his 95 propositions (or theses) against the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church on the Castle Church door at Wittenberg, Germany. Luther's intention was to bring reform to the Roman Catholic Church, and in doing so was challenging the authority of the Pope. With the refusal of the Roman Catholic Church to heed Luther's call to reformation and return to biblical doctrines and practices, the Protestant Reformation began. From this Reformation four major divisions or traditions of Protestantism would emerge: Lutheran, Reformed, Anabaptist, and Anglican. During this time God raised up godly men in different countries in order to once again restore churches throughout the world to their biblical roots and to biblical doctrines and practices.……Underlying the Protestant Reformation lay four basic doctrines in which the reformers believed the Roman Catholic Church to be in error. These four questions or doctrines are How is a person saved? Where does religious authority lie? What is the church? And what is the essence of Christian living? In answering these questions, Protestant Reformers such as Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin, and John Knox established what would be known as the "Five Solas" of the Reformation (sola being the Latin word for "alone"). These five points of doctrine were at the heart of the Protestant Reformation, and it was for these five essential Biblical doctrines that the Protestant Reformers would take their stand against the Roman Catholic Church, resisting the demands placed on them to recant, even to the point of death. These five essential doctrines of the Protestant Reformation are as follows:……1-"Sola Scriptura," or Scripture Alone: This affirms the Biblical doctrine that the Bible alone is the sole authority for all matters of faith and practice. Scripture and Scripture alone is the standard by which all teachings and doctrines of the church must be measured. As Martin Luther so eloquently stated when asked to recant on his teachings, “Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason – I do not accept the authority of the popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other – my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen.”……2-"Sola Gratia," Salvation by Grace Alone: This affirms the Biblical doctrine that salvation is by God's grace alone and that we are rescued from His wrath by His grace alone. God's grace in Christ is not merely necessary, but is the sole efficient cause of salvation. This grace is the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit that brings us to Christ by releasing us from our bondage to sin and raising us from spiritual death to spiritual life.……3-"Sola Fide," Salvation by Faith Alone: This affirms the Biblical doctrine that justification is by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone. It is by faith in Christ that His righteousness is imputed to us as the only possible satisfaction of God's perfect justice.……4-"Solus Christus," In Christ Alone: This affirms the Biblical doctrine that salvation is found in Christ alone and that His sinless life and substitutionary atonement alone are sufficient for our justification and reconciliation to God the Father. The gospel has not been preached if Christ's substitutionary work is not declared, and if faith in Christ and His work is not solicited.……5-"Soli Deo Gloria, For the Glory of God Alone: This affirms the Biblical doctrine that salvation is of God and has been accomplished by God for His glory alone. It affirms that as Christians we must glorify Him always, and must live our entire lives before the face of God, under the authority of God, and for His glory alone.……These five important and fundamental doctrines are the reason for the Protestant Reformation. They are at the heart of where the Roman Catholic Church went wrong in its doctrine, and why the Protestant Reformation was necessary to return churches throughout the world to correct doctrine and biblical teaching. They are just as important today in evaluating a church and its teachings as they were then. In many ways, much of Protestant Christianity needs to be challenged to return to these fundamental doctrines of the faith, much like the reformers challenged the Roman Catholic Church to do in the sixteenth century.

Is apostolic succession Biblical?”……Answer: The doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed the apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing throughout the centuries, even unto today. The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the leader of the apostles, with the greatest authority, and therefore his successors carry on the greatest authority. The Roman Catholic Church combines this belief with the concept that Peter later became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishops that followed Peter were accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. Apostolic succession, combined with Peter's supremacy among the apostles, results in the Roman bishop being the supreme authority of the Catholic Church – the Pope.……However, nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of "apostolic succession." Further, neither is Peter presented as "supreme" over the other apostles. The Apostle Paul, in fact, rebukes Peter when Peter was leading others astray

Galatians 2:11-14. 11 When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? 15We who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners 16 know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

Yes, the Apostle Peter had a prominent role. Yes, perhaps the Apostle Peter was the leader of the apostles (although the Book of Acts records the Apostle Paul and Jesus' brother James as also having prominent leadership roles). Whatever the case, Peter was not the "commander" or supreme authority over the other apostles. Even if apostolic succession could be demonstrated from Scripture, which it cannot, apostolic succession would not result in Peter's successors being absolutely supreme over the other apostles' successors.……Catholics point to Matthias being chosen to replace Judas as the 12th apostle in Acts chapter 1 as an example of apostolic succession. While Matthias did indeed "suceed" Judas as an apostle, this is in no sense an argument for continuing apostolic succession. Matthias being chosen to replace Judas is only an argument for the church replacing ungodly and unfaithful leaders (such as Judas), with godly and faithful leaders (such as Matthias). Nowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority. No, Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church.

Ephesians 2:19-2019 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.. What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles. The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved. And that is exactly what God has provided in His Word

Ephesians 1:1313 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession-to the praise of his glory.

Colossians 1:5 5 the faith and love that spring from the hope that is stored up for you in heaven and that you have already heard about in the word of truth, the gospel 6 that has come to you. All over the world this gospel is bearing fruit and growing, just as it has been doing among you since the day you heard it and understood God's grace in all its truth

2 Timothy 2:15Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

2 Timothy 4:2.Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage-with great patience and careful instruction……In short, apostolic succession is not biblical. The concept of apostolic succession is never found in Scripture. What is found in Scripture is that the true church will teach what the Scriptures teach and will compare all doctrines and practices to Scripture in order to determine what is true and right. The Roman Catholic Church claims that a lack of ongoing apostolic authority results in doctrinal confusion and chaos. It is an unfortunate truth (that the apostles acknowledged) that false teachers would arise

2 Peter 2:1-3. But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up

Admittedly, the lack of "supreme authority" amongst non-Catholic churches results in many different interpretations. However, these differences in interpretation are not the result of Scripture being unclear. Rather, they are the result of even non-Catholic Christians carrying on the Catholic tradition of interpreting Scripture in accordance with their own traditions. If Scripture is studied in its entirety and in its proper context, the truth can be easily determined. Doctrinal differences and denominational conflicts are a result of some Christians refusing to agree with what Scripture says – not a result of there being no "supreme authority" to interpret Scripture.……Alignment with Scriptural teaching, not apostolic succession, is the determining factor of the trueness of a church. What is mentioned in Scripture is the idea that the Word of God was to be the guide that the church was to follow

Acts 20:32. "Now I commit you to God and to the word of his grace, which can build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice

2 Timothy 3:16-17. 16 At my first defense, no one came to my support, but everyone deserted me. May it not be held against them. 17 But the Lord stood at my side and gave me strength, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. And I was delivered from the lion's mouth.

It is the Scriptures that teachings are to be compared with

Acts 17:10-12. In Berea:As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 Many of the Jews believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.

Apostolic authority was passed on through the writings of the apostles, not through apostolic succession.

“What was the Great Schism?”……Answer: The Great Schism is the title given to the rift that formed in the Church in the eleventh century A.D. This separation led to the “Roman Catholic” Church, hereby known as the Western Church, and the “Greek Catholic” or “Greek Orthodox Church,” hereby known as the Eastern Church.……In order to best understand what happened, we need to examine history and the context in which that history occurred. The Church from the fourth century onwards had 5 patriarchs or heads, and each one governed a jurisdictional area or patriarchate. The patriarchates were located in the west in Rome, which spoke Latin, and in the east in Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Byzantium, which all spoke Greek.……Wanting to create a new Christian empire, and due to the degree of paganism in Rome, the Emperor Constantine decided to move the capital of the Empire to Byzantium (which was later renamed Constantinople after him). Around this time, and shortly after this move, the barbaric “Germanic” tribes began invading across Europe. This invasion had the effect of plunging Europe into what is known as the “Dark Ages.” “What were the Dark Ages?”……Answer: The "Dark Ages" are commonly considered to be the early part of the period known as the Middle Ages. Often the term Dark Ages refers to the initial five hundred years following the fall of Rome in 476. It is thought of as beginning around 450 AD and continuing till 1000 AD. During this time period Rome and other cities deteriorated because of the invasions of barbarians from northern and central Europe. Since there was no longer an imperial authority with the power to protect the citizens of the cities, the urban population declined sharply during this period of history. Another consequence of the lack of a strong central power was the development of the feudal system especially from 900-1150 AD. During this feudal age, most parishes had rural populations and towns tended to be smaller less numerous. Castles and walled towns were guarded by the feudal lord's armies that provided security and safety to the peasants and townspeople from the invading barbarians. One of the consequences of the feudal system was the decline in church structures because of feudalistic pressures and control that was put upon them.……It was during this time that a new religious movement called monasticism developed. After the establishment of the Benedictine order at Monte Cassino in 529 AD, monasticism spread quickly throughout the medieval church and the monastery replaced the functions of the early church and became a link between the classical city and medieval city. The withdrawal of the church from cities to monasteries caused the church to be oriented more inwardly than outwardly. While sometimes the church is blamed for the spiritual darkness of the Dark Ages, in many ways it was the only light, no matter how dim, that shone in the darkness of surrounding barbarism and heathenism. During this time it was the priests and the monks that saved from the ruins of the Roman Empire the treasures of classical literature-along with the Holy Scriptures and patristic writings-and preserved them for the future. Certainly while the light that shone was more from ecclesiastical tradition and not always the clear light found in the Word of God, nevertheless it was light in the dark days of that time and it continued until the Reformation brought the true full light of Christ back to the world. Yet even throughout this spiritually dark time Christ had His witnesses in all ages and countries. The combination of economic and political turmoil, geographical distances, and linguistic differences, created a rift that caused the eventual estrangement of West from East.……Given these factors it is not surprising that very few western theologians spoke Greek, and instead wrote and spoke primarily in Latin. They did not have access to, nor could they read, the writings of the eastern theologians. As such, most of the western theology was based on a few key Latin theologians, whereas the East had numerous Greek theologians, and did not have to focus on any particular theologian’s teaching.……The flexibility of the Greek language (there was approximately ten times the vocabulary than Latin), allowed for more expressive and deeper writings. The decline of literacy in the west led to the clergy being the primary teaching authority. This is contrasted with the east where general education and more universities created a literate populace, and thus more lay theologians who played an active role in the church.……The growing list of differences between East and West simply exacerbated the tensions. One of the most striking differences was that as new people were evangelized in the west, they had to use Latin as their liturgical and ecclesiastical language, while looking to Rome for leadership. On the other hand, missionaries from the east translated the Bible into the language of the people. When the new churches in the East became mature, they became self-governing and administratively independent from their mother church. In the West, Rome began to require all clergy to be celibate; whereas in the East they retained married clergy.……So, while the "filioque controversy" was the cause of the "Great Schism," with the eastern and western bishops excommunicating each other, it was in fact only the breaking point. “What is the filioque clause / filioque controversy?”……Answer: The filioque clause was, and still is, a controversy in the church in relation to the Holy Spirit. The question is, "from whom did the Holy Spirit proceed, the Father, or the Father and the Son?" The word filioque means "and son" in Latin. It is referred to as the "filioque clause" because the phrase "and son" was added to the Nicene Creed, indicating that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father "and Son." There was so much contention over this issue that it eventually led to the split between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches in A. D. 1054. The two churches are still not in agreement on the filioque clause.……John 14:26 tells us, "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name…" John 15:26 tells us, "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, He will testify about me." See also John 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you foreverand Philippians 1:19. for I know that through your prayers and the help given by the Spirit of Jesus Christ, what has happened to me will turn out for my deliveranceThese Scriptures seem to indicate that the Spirit is sent out by both the Father and the Son. The essential matter in the filioque clause is a desire to protect the deity of the Holy Spirit. The Bible clearly teaches that the Holy Spirit is God Acts 5:3-4. Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."Those who oppose the filioque clause object because they believe the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son makes the Holy Spirit "subservient" to the Father and Son. Those who uphold the filioque clause believe that the Holy Spirit proceeding from both the Father and the Son does not impact the Spirit being equally God with the Father and the Son.……The filioque clause controversy likely involves an aspect of God’s person that we will never be able to fully grasp. God, who is an infinite being, is ultimately incomprehensible to our finite human minds. The Holy Spirit is God, and He was sent by God as Jesus Christ’s "replacement" here on earth. The question of whether the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father, or by the Father and the Son, likely cannot be decisively answered, nor does it absolutely need to be. The filioque clause will perhaps have to remain a controversy. Differences, disagreements, and distance had been laying the foundation for the Great Schism for centuries. The Great Schism was essentially the "forerunner" of the Protestant Reformation, with a refusal to accept the unbiblical concept of the supremacy of Rome at its core.