How well do you know Catholic Christianity?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Helen on September 4, 2010 at 10:03am

Roy, you know what? I just re-read your comment to Raj: 'It is a difference of opinion of the authority of Scripture'; and I think this not actually what the problem is.


The problem, in my opinion, is that the RCC claims to have kept the true Revelation received by the apostles, and since she is an apostolic church, she vowed to guard it. (This is all based on the promise made by Jesus to the Apostles to enlighten the with the Truth by coming of the Holy Spirit).

Then, there was the Reformation, which opposed some of the teachings that the RCC holds based on her revealed truth. Then, there was a rupture.

The fact is, Rome claims to have the authoritative interpretation of the Scriptures. Protestantism, protests that authority.

Therefore, I believe the issue is not on the "authority of the Scripture" as you put it (because the Scriptures are the word of God, Rome professes that), but the problem is the authority to guard the revealed truth that the Scriptures contain. That is the biggest discrepancy between the two sides.

Protestants say anyone can read a Bible and receive the divine revelation without error. Catholics say, the Apostles received the Truth, kept it passing it on to their disciples. Thus, the Apostolic Church is supposed to guard that truth for the benefit of all Christians.

As we see in 1Timothy 3; Timothy was an appointed disciple of Paul:

11And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. 12That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.

13What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.

Now, I think that when Timothy says "sound teachings" he is warning people to be aware of the risk of accepting erroneous teachings...

I think that is where the problem is, interpretation of the Scriptures, NOT refusal to accept the Authority of the Scriptures by the RCC.


Please let me have your thoughts on this.
Cheers,
Helen

Permalink Reply by RoyW on September 4, 2010 at 12:01pm

Helen,

It sounds that you feel the RCC has a claim to the Bible. I don't think so. I believe that all that believe in Him make up the one true church. I do not believe the RCC is the one true church but does have people in it that belong to the church. I believe that that what eventually turned into the RCC was the church. But as emperors, popes, etc., took over, they ceased to represent the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe I am a part of His church. I believe you are also a part of His church but it has very little to do with what earthly institution you belong to. I do not believe that the RCC can dominate His church or to pretend to speak for Christ. I believe He speaks for Himself through His Word which He promised us through His Spirit. He still has many in this world to add to His church. The sacraments don't save, Faith in Jesus Christ, God the Son, saves us. There is no need to join any earthly institution. Salvation is available to all who will believe in Him. There is no need to go through a priest, preacher, pastor or anyone else to find faith in Christ. Anyone can pick up a Bible, read it, and find faith for salvation.

You have a lot of pride in your earthly institution. You do a good job speaking on its behalf. However, a person that belongs to the RCC has no advantage over the person that doesn't belong to any earthly institution in coming to Christ. The gentleman that spoke has the right to know that salvation is in Christ and in Him alone. It has nothing to do with any earthly institution.

There are people in all earthly institutions including the RCC that belong but are not saved and no prayer from any priest could pray them into heaven once they die. The church can save no one. A person is only saved by being drawn by the Spirit of God and confesses faith in Jesus Christ. We are in disagreement on the authority of Scripture, the authority of a church, or the authority of a priest or pope.

I wish there could be agreement but as long as we disagree on the authority of Scripture, there can be no agreement. We do agree on many things (I believe enough for us to be brother and sister in Him). However, the issue of authority divides us. You believe in the superiority of the RCC. I don't.

I do not know how to cross that divide. If you continue to read the Scripture plus the interpretations of your teachers, I see no hope. I believe He can give you the ability to read His Word and come to your own conclusions. You do not have the faith to rest solely on Scripture. I am not going to fault you for that.

In Christ alone,
Roy

Permalink Reply by Helen on September 4, 2010 at 2:19pm

Hi Roy,

Thanks a lot for your comments (in bold).

It sounds that you feel the RCC has a claim to the Bible. I don't think so. I believe that all that believe in Him make up the one true church. I do not believe the RCC is the one true church but does have people in it that belong to the church.

Roy, I don’t think the Church has a claim to the Bible. I was merely stating that the Church teaches what the Apostles received.

I believe that that what eventually turned into the RCC was the church.

I think so too.

But as emperors, popes, etc., took over, they ceased to represent the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I admit I do not know anything about emperors. As for popes, they are bishops of Rome or overseers, who occupy Peter's chair, who the Church claims to have been the first overseer or bishop.

Does that make them free of sins? Of course, not. Only Jesus was free of sins.
For instance, Pope Benedict goes to confession once a week. Was Peter free of sin? No. Didn’t Paul even rebuke him (Galatians 2:11-21)? Infallibility is not synonymous with non-sinfulness. It only means that their teachings of the Gospel reflect the teachings of Jesus. Just as in the example I gave above, Galatians 2:11-21. Peter's teaching was right, as Paul pointed out, but his attitude not.

I believe I am a part of His church. I believe you are also a part of His church but it has very little to do with what earthly institution you belong to.

Of course you are. All Christians are, not only some Catholics or some Protestants. But all of us.

However, the RCC claims to be founded by Jesus, therefore, although she is in the world, she is guided by the Holy Spirit, Who is not from the world. Does that prevent the RCC from having sinners as members? Absolutely not. But lets face it, even one of the twelve didn’t belong to God, so we’d be naïve to expect that only Saints make up any Church on earth. Didn't Jesus say he came not for ones who are already healed, but for the (spiritually) sick ones?

I do not believe that the RCC can dominate His church or to pretend to speak for Christ.

Fair enough. I respect your opinion. But the Church’s claim is this: That Christ is the head, we are the body and the teachings come from Him. She only guards it. So I don’t think the Church is pretending, that would be cruel, they really believe it.

I believe He speaks for Himself through His Word which He promised us through His Spirit. He still has many in this world to add to His church.

I think so too. Everything was revealed and whatever was not revealed while He was here, the Holy Spirit revealed to Christ’s chosen 12 at Pentecost, and they went all over teaching what they received.

The sacraments don't save, Faith in Jesus Christ, God the Son, saves us.

The RCC DOES NOT teach that Sacraments save. She teaches that they bring us grace and help us to keep in the grace of God.

Salvation comes from faith in Christ and the one whom sent Him, that is what the RCC teaches.

There is no need to join any earthly institution. Salvation is available to all who will believe in Him.

Well, since the Gospel teaches: repent and be baptized, and since the Gospel also speaks about the laying of hands to ‘ordain’ the ministers of the Gospel, I am obliged to at least to consider that we are ought to have a community of faith, whatever one may call it, church, congregation or something to that effect.

There is no need to go through a priest, preacher, pastor or anyone else to find faith in Christ.

We might not need them, but not even the Scriptures say that we can’t have them. On the contrary, it give us plenty of evidence that the new believers in fact did so. We only need to read the letters of Paul and Peter for evidence.

Anyone can pick up a Bible, read it, and find faith for salvation.

Absolutely. Anyone can do it on their own. I don’t think God would oppose to that.

You have a lot of pride in your earthly institution. You do a good job speaking on its behalf.

Pride is not really the word, I don’t think. I am very courageous to speak up. Many Catholics are not. They prefer to hear: You are being deceived or your Church is unhealthy, the whore of Babylon, and other stuff. Instead of saying why they believe in what they believe.

However, a person that belongs to the RCC has no advantage over the person that doesn't belong to any earthly institution in coming to Christ. The gentleman that spoke has the right to know that salvation is in Christ and in Him alone. It has nothing to do with any earthly institution.

Well Roy, I never said to anyone that Salvation is not in Christ. If I said that, would not be a Christian. But I believe anyyone has the right to also know that there is another view besides the protestant one.

Now, please I do not mean to ‘bicker’ with anyone, I promise. But if any Church is alright, then I ( and this is my opinion) prefer to be part of the one that claims to have been founded by Jesus, because to my mind, this immediately makes it more than an just an ‘earthly’ institution. But that is just me…


There are people in all earthly institutions including the RCC that belong but are not saved and no prayer from any priest could pray them into heaven once they die.

There are a two points here. So I will speak as a Catholic, because I do not any other doctrines:

Belonging to an institution does not save any one. Faithfulness to the Gospel does.
Priest prayer do not save any one. Each individual is responsible for their own salvation through faith in Christ.


The church can save no one. A person is only saved by being drawn by the Spirit of God and confesses faith in Jesus Christ.

Correct. Is not the job of any Church to save any one, but to guide them towards the path of Salvation, through Jesus Christ. However, in the Catholic view, the believer must do more than simply profess faith in Christ, they must strive to be Christ-like and keep the commandments and make reparation for their sins.

We are in disagreement on the authority of Scripture, the authority of a church, or the authority of a priest or pope.

Yes, I am afraid we are.

I wish there could be agreement but as long as we disagree on the authority of Scripture, there can be no agreement. We do agree on many things (I believe enough for us to be brother and sister in Him). However, the issue of authority divides us. You believe in the superiority of the RCC. I don't.

That’s true, we don’t seem to agree. But let clarify this: I do not believe in the superiority of the RCC. I believe the RCC is best equipped to guide me live in Christ. I see many good things in Protestantism, but I also see some faults, such as justification being an one-time event, and Sola-fide, and some other things... So I opted to keep the faith of my ancestors and continue Catholic.


I do not know how to cross that divide. If you continue to read the Scripture plus the interpretations of your teachers, I see no hope.

Well, Roy, but what is Protestantism? Isn’t it the scriptural interpretation of Luther, Calvin and others?

All of this that you have come to believe and accept as true, such as: There is no need for confession, no need to be baptized (if your denomination says that), Faith alone and so on…All this came from the interpretation of human beings. Even if people say, well, infant baptism is not in the bible, or confession, purgatory, etc, are not on the bible or anything that the RCC teaches, the Church can easly demonstrate that in fact they are. Then what comes into play is the understanding of the Scriptures. Nothing, I say this with a great level of confidence, nothing was made up.

The way I see it, interpretation is necessary in order to understand the Word. No-one can just open the Bible stare at it and then say: Now I know the truth. He/she has to read, think and discern what it contains. Can anyone truly say that whatever they've come to believe, I mean whatever bible doctrine they have, is because they figured it out alone? Or did they at some point learn it through going to church, listening to their preacher (who in turn was giving them HIS own interpretation, an interpretation according to Luther, Calvin, or some other protestant thinker) in order build their core belief? Isn't this why there are so many different denominations?

As I see it, this is absolutely no different to what Catholics go through. The only thing is that the Catholic interpretation hasn’t changed in 2 thousand years, at least when it comes to the Gospel, not other matter of morals and so on, in this respect i cannot tell you for sure because I don't know enought about it…

I believe He can give you the ability to read His Word and come to your own conclusions. You do not have the faith to rest solely on Scripture. I am not going to fault you for that.

Many times people may come to different conclusions on the same bible. I have even seen pastors that have completely different interpretations of the same passage. In the RCC, they would have to teach the official understanding of the Church.

Anyways, even though we don’t agree. It’s been a pleasure discussing this with you and I do hope I have not bored you to death...lol

God bless and thanks again!
Helen

Permalink Reply by RoyW on September 4, 2010 at 3:14pm

Helen,

You are very much entitled to your opinion but note what you say:
However, the RCC claims to be founded by Jesus, therefore, although she is in the world, she is guided by the Holy Spirit, Who is not from the world.

I claim to be a part of the church that was founded by Jesus Christ. You are wanting to say that the church you belong to was founded by Christ making it superior to others. This is the area I disagree with you on. I do not believe the RCC was founded by Jesus Christ. He founded His church and that is not the RCC. The church that Jesus founded does not look like the RCC.

You want to keep saying that you are Catholic and I am Protestant. I don't lay claim to either. I claim to be a member of the church founded by Jesus Christ Himself. This church is not Protestant, neither is it RCC. The church is not Presbyterian or Methodist. It is simply His church. When He returns to get His church, He will not be returning to the Catholic, Methodist, Baptist or anything else. He will not be returning to Rome, Independence, MO, or Salt Lake. He will not be going to the Vatican as it will cease to be. When He returns, it will be for His church. Your faith needs to be in Him and in Him alone.

The message of Christ is not limited to any institution. There was no way that the RCC could contain the Gospel message regardless of how much they tried. The Gospel is way too big for any earthly institution. Jesus has taken His Gospel to the whole world. If a Catholic wants to receive Him, they can. However, he will not be going through a priest to get to Him.

Jesus did not found the Roman Catholic Church (that's absurd), He founded His church. Neither did He found the Protestant Church (that's equally absurd). He founded His church. There is absolutely nothing wrong with man organizing structures in Rome or anywhere else to better serve his efforts to serve Him. However, the structures better keep Jesus as center of their organization or He will move on and work through another people as He is doing today. He will not be limited by any organization. People all over the world are finding Him as their Savior. The church is growing. The growth rate is great. We are ridiculous to be discussing what is the real church. His church is all over the world. We are all a part of His church that begin that day in Jerusalem when the Holy Spirit fell on the believers waiting on Him. That same power continues throughout the earth. No structure will ever contain that power.

Ac 2:47
And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. NIV

That is still happening today. He is still building His church. He may send some to the Catholic Church but proportionately He is not sending nearly as many. Meanwhile the RCC proclaims, "We are the real church," but He continues to build His church. Those who belong to His church are one. There remains one church and there has always been one church. You once said a Calvinist would not be accepted as a Catholic. Any church that would stop a Calvinist from being a part of their organization simply does not represent Christ but their own selfish purposes. This may seem disrespectful but I am one here to tell you that the RCC is not the only earthly institutions that would reject a Calvinist. Christ and His church would never reject a Calvinist, an Armenian or any other person that is seeking to understand Scripture to the very best that he possibly can. No one enjoys discussing difference of opinion any more than I. However, I remain a part of all those that claim that Jesus is the only way to God.

Nope, His church welcomes me with open arms and I am very happy to be a part of His church. God bless you, Sister Helen.

Roy

Permalink Reply by Helen on September 4, 2010 at 9:55pm

Hi Roy,

Well, thanks for that.

You are very well entitled to have your opinion too, Roy. Absolutely.

I, personally, do not think that Jesus meant for his church to hold thousands of different interpretations of one Truth.

As the Gospel according John tell us, Jesus wished for the UNITY of the 'flock' under one shepherd... Therefore, one of these thousands of Churches must hold the truth, not all of them. That would make the Word of God a lie, and we know that is not possible.

God bless you.

Permalink Reply by RoyW on September 5, 2010 at 6:00am

Helen,

The church is not an earthly institution with a name on it like Methodist or Roman Catholic. The church is comprised of all those who have come to Jesus for rest. These are those who believe He is exactly Who He says He is. These are the ones who have put their trust in Him for their salvation. They may be a member of one of the thousands of churches that you are speaking about but that is definitely not their main allegiance. They many not have everything in the Word of God figured out but they are searching for Him continually and growing in Him. They are becoming more and more like Him. They are His sheep. They follow Him where ever He leads them.

How do you find His church? Notice what He says:

Mt 16:15-18

15 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

17 Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. NIV

Some have misunderstood what Jesus was saying. Peter had just confessed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. That is his confession of faith. That is what His church is being built upon and all those who confess Him as such become a part of that church. It cannot be just a formality, it had to be a heart confession as Peter's was. Peter was ready to follow Jesus to the death, even though he would later receive the power of His Spirit better equipping him for his task. The rock He was speaking of was faith in Him. Those that believe in Him will follow Him. They will seek out others that also believe. They will work together and worship together. Some would become pastors, teacher, evangelists, etc. Organization is a natural product of this but when the men of that organization begin to seek to control His movement, He steps outside of that structure. He is not bound by any earthly structure. His church will continue to move on because He is the head of His church.

I am a member of His church.

Roy

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on September 2, 2010 at 5:10pm

Raj,

The original Christians were Christians, period and guess what, the true Christians throughout the ages have been Christians who do belong to different churches, but understand that no church die for them. It was Christ who died for me; it was Christ who shed His blood for me, not a church. I belong to the Protestant church, but my family is worldwide under many different church names. My bond with Christians is not a name of a church, but the witness of the Spirit with their spirit. Christ unites us and not a silly title of a church building. The R. Catholic church has taught for ages that unless you belong to her you are not a Christian, but that has always been and it will always be a lie from the pit of hell. The Apostle's creed states that "we (Catholics) believe in the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church." This phrase singles out the Catholic Church as being the only "real" church since they descended from the apostolic succession of Peter according to their false teachings. Thus, they are the one true church in which men can be saved. This notion was even written about this week concerning Pope Benedict's remarks concerning the state of other non-catholic churches. The pope wrote “since only the Catholic Church has descended the true line of succession of St. Peter, all the other churches, and denominations are not true churches.

Their doctrine includes the 7 sacraments and that infant baptism is the only way to be saved. Infant baptism is not even taught in the word. The position of going to heaven is determined by good works. Great works you make it, pretty good works you can make it to purgatory (purgatory is not biblical either), and bad works straight down baby! We are not save by works that is a lie from the pit of hell as well. Works are essential as a consequence of being born again, but they are not meritorious in any way for salvation.

The word Catholic is not found in Scripture (much less roman catholic) nor was it taught by any Apostle. If Jesus wanted to name a church as the Roman Catholic Church, then He would have done it. Everything that has happened has happened, because God has permitted it. God is in control not man. Every single thing that has ever happened has happened because is His perfect will or His permissive will doing it or allowing it.

The Church of Jesus is worldwide, Universal; in that sense the Protestant churches are Catholic as well, but not Roman Catholic. The church of Christ is comprised of those that worship in Spirit and in truth. Not of those that that practices manmade traditions that have no biblical backing.

John 4:23-24
23 “But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. 24 “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

The context of this text is a discussion that Jesus has with the woman at the well. She correctly recognizes Jesus as a prophet and asks him a question regarding the appropriate place to worship God. Jesus teaches that the place for worship was of no consequence to God. It does not matter whether we worship in the city or in the country. It does not matter whether we are in a house or in a tent, or in an open field. The place where we worship has nothing to do with whether the worship is acceptable to God. We are the church; the members are the church, not an instauration created by men.

The “true worshipers” don't follow their own traditions rather than the Word of God. This verse clearly demonstrates that God SEEKS true worshipers. There is such a thing as false worship, or ignorant worship. The Samaritans were guilty of ignorant worship. Jesus contrasts this with “true worship.”

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholicism
The first great rupture in the Catholic Church followed the Council of Ephesus (AD 431), which affirmed the Virgin Mary as Theotokos. The majority of those who refused to accept this Council were Persian Christians, a Church now known as the Assyrian Church of the East. The next major break was after the Council of Chalcedon (AD 451). This Council repudiated Eutychian Monophysitism. The terms adopted by this Council were unacceptable to many Christians who preferred to use a Christology formulated primarily in Alexandria. These Christians are now often referred to in English as the Oriental Orthodox Communion, thus treating "Eastern" and "Oriental" as not synonymous).

The next major rift within Catholicism was in the 11th century. Doctrinal disputes, including that about the Filioque clause, conflicts between methods of Church government, and perhaps the evolution of separate rites and practices, precipitated a split in AD 1054 that divided the Catholic Church once again, this time between a "West" and an "East". England, France, the Holy Roman Empire, Scandinavia, and much of the rest of Western Europe were in the Western camp, and Greece, Russia and many of other Slavic lands, Anatolia, and the Christians in Syria and Egypt who accepted the Council of Chalcedon made up the eastern camp. This division is called the East-West Schism. The most recent major split within the Catholic Church occurred in the 16th century with the Protestant Reformation, after which many parts of the Catholic Church rejected the leadership of Rome and reformed themselves, becoming Protestant.

All of the preceding groups, including Protestants, consider themselves to be fully and completely Catholic. All of them claim to be either part of the Catholic Church or the only Catholic Church.
End of article.

There were always those that did not agree with the RCC from the beginning and for multiple reasons. God has always had a remnant of believers who do not bow to the trends, peer pressure or wealth to be gain, but surrendered their lives to the service of the Lord.

The truth is worth fighting for Raj. Only the truth can set us free.

Blessings

Permalink Reply by Sharon Theresa Theil on September 3, 2010 at 7:15am

David,

Name me an early Christian who was not a Catholic Christian.

Permalink Reply by Helen on September 3, 2010 at 10:06am

Hi Sharon,

I thought I'd jump in to add this to your point:

History of ecclesiastical use of "catholic"

Ignatius of Antioch

A letter written by Ignatius of Antioch to Christians in Smyrna[10] around 106 AD is the earliest surviving witness to the use of the term Catholic Church (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8). By Catholic Church Ignatius designated the universal church. Ignatius considered that certain heretics of his time, who disavowed that Jesus was a material being who actually suffered and died, saying instead that "he only seemed to suffer" (Smyrnaeans, 2), were not really Christians.[11] The term is also used in the Martyrdom of Polycarp in 155 and in the Muratorian fragment, about 177 .

Cyril of Jerusalem
Cyril of Jerusalem (circa 315-386), venerated as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Anglican Communion, urged those he was instructing in the Christian faith: "If ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord's House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens "houses of the Lord"), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of this holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God" (Catechetical Lectures, XVIII, 26).[12]

Theodosius I
The term Catholic Christians entered Roman Imperial law when Theodosius I, Emperor from 379 to 395, reserved that name for adherents of "that religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved by faithful tradition and which is now professed by the Pontiff (Pope) Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria ...as for the others, since in our judgement they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics, and shall not presume to give their conventicles the name of churches." This law of 27 February 380 was included in Book 16 of the Codex Theodosianus.[13] It established Catholic Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire.

Augustine of Hippo
The use of the term Catholic to distinguish the "true" church from heretical groups is found also in Augustine who wrote:

"In the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep (Jn 21:15-19), down to the present episcopate (in Rome; here Augustine refers to the Petrine succession of the Pope).

"And so, lastly, does the very name of "Catholic", which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.

"Such then in number and importance are the precious ties belonging to the Christian name which keep a believer in the Catholic Church, as it is right they should ... With you, where there is none of these things to attract or keep me... No one shall move me from the faith which binds my mind with ties so many and so strong to the Christian religion... For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church."

— St. Augustine (354–430): Against the Epistle of Manichaeus called Fundamental, chapter 4: Proofs of the Catholic Faith.[14]
St Vincent of Lerins

A contemporary of Augustine, St. Vincent of Lerins, wrote in 434 (under the pseudonym Peregrinus) a work known as the Commonitoria ("Memoranda"). While insisting that, like the human body, church doctrine develops while truly keeping its identity (sections 54-59, chapter XXIII), he stated: "In the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense 'catholic,' which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors" (section 6, end of chapter II) .


Now let us keep in mind that St Ignatius was a Bishop of what he himself calls the Universal Church , or Catholic in Greek.

Since the succession of bishops preceeding St Ignatius and his fellow contemporary bishops can be tracked all the way back to St Peter, there is not doubt he as well as St Peter and other fathers of the Church were members of the same Church, the one founded by Jesus, the Catholic Church. This is was not refuted even by M. Luther and other reformists, because it is a historical fact.

God Bless,
Helen

Permalink Reply by Helen on September 3, 2010 at 11:14am

David, you said : " I belong to the Protestant church"

But should you not have said I belong to A Protestant church, since there are 38 thousand denominations world round, which DO NOT fully agree with one another?

Cheers,
H

Ps, Even if you consider the issues in which they not agree to be unimportant, still GOD's TRUTH is ONE. Not 38 thousand slightly different ones.

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on September 5, 2010 at 2:23am

Helen,

As Roy and most Christians who have been taught by the Spirit of truth and not manmade religions will tell you, and as I have said in many places throughout this discussion:

I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ, my Lord and Savior, the bride of Christ. Christ's church is worldwide and is inclusive of all born again believers.

John 3

1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him." 3 In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again."

I reckon there are born again Catholics and Protestants. I used the phrase Protestant on myself to draw a distention between RC and Protestants, that was all, but is not how I go around claiming myself to be.

I am a child of God. Saved, sealed and bought by the precious blood of the Lamb. I fellowship where I see that the word of God is being honor closely to the divine teachings of God.

Luther as well as the other Reformers knew what making the bible available to all would entail. They knew it would created many divisions, because men would interpret it wrong, but they trusted that God would guide those who are truly seeking Him to all truth, as He has promise in His word, not through a Catechism. The divisions in secondary doctrines (I asked you before and you never answered me, do you know the difference between Primary and Secondary doctrines?) are unfortunate, but worth making the bible available to all. God is in Control of the world and His word.

All Christian Protestants agree in the primary doctrines and we do have differences in the secondary ones. We wish it would not be so for the word does tell us that we should all come to the unity of the knowledge of Christ, but the Church of Christ has always had such divisions. The RCC gained power because of her alliance with government, but there where Christians throughout the past 1500 years who were persecuted by the RCC for not accepting their beliefs. Of course the RCC would have you think they where heretics.

>>Even if you consider the issues in which they not agree to be unimportant, still GOD's TRUTH is ONE. Not 38 thousand slightly different ones.

God's truth is one, for sure, but the RCC is probably the furthers from the truth. If ever a church has been extremely wrong, is the RCC. The doctrines it teaches are damnable, Salvation by faith and works, as if works were meritorious for salvation, heresy, heresy of the worst kind, changing the word of God to such levels. Salvation is by faith alone and the works are but a result of such salvation, they are not meritorious for salvation at all. The majority of the men that started the Reformation where Catholics. Among the most educated men the RCC had to offer. Once they read the scriptures and were enlightened by the Holy Spirit, they were able to see how wrong the RCC was with her money making indulgences and their persecution of all those who did not want anything to do with the RCC. So yes the RCC has had some unity in her false doctrines, but even in such, the popes have contradicted themselves throughout history on what should be the truth. So I would not be so proud to be a RC if I were you, not with the many horrible things the RCC is guilty of doing. First and foremost changing the word of God to create a system dependant on man and church structure instead of God alone.

Martin Luther at the Leipzig Debate reflecting a revolutionary new attitude said the following: 'No believing Christian can be forced to recognize any authority beyond the sacred Scripture, which is exclusively invested with Divine right.'2 Over against the pretentious claims of the papacy, Luther set the Word of God as its own interpreter, through the operation of the Holy Spirit, independent of Church and councils, of fathers and tradition. Hence opening a fresh and significant chapter in the history of hermeneutics.

It is much better to have a million churches who have minor to no differences, for the exception of a Church name, than to be in one united Church full of lies.

Obviously I do not think highly of the Catholic Church and the more I study its doctrines the more I dislike its teachings. I have read enough of the RCC beliefs to not want anything to do with it. I do believe there are born again Christians in it, God is good and He is able to save despite the atrocities of man.

Blessings.

Permalink Reply by Helen on September 5, 2010 at 10:00am

David,
Honestly, do you really think that you should be talking to me like that?
I will read your posts when you address me more respectfully....
May God Bless you,
Helen

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 12
• 13
• 14
• 15
• 16
• 17
• Next ›
• Page