The Catholic Church.

[Serving Zion]

Indeed. The Catholic Church is an extension of the incarnation, continuing Christ's mission to teach and sanctify. It is the body of Christ continuing in time and thus it is a divine institution. If the Church is not a divine institution, it is nothing more than a religious Elks Club.

Therefore we are forced to ask whether it in fact does the deeds of Christ or is as you say, a club. Do you believe the Catholic Church has throughout times past always done the things that Christ would do?

 

[Walpole]

Therefore we are forced to ask whether it in fact does the deeds of Christ or is as you say, a club. Do you believe the Catholic Church has throughout times past always done the things that Christ would do?

I think you are conflating the teaching authority of the Church with the sinfulness of particular individual members, of which I am one.

The faith and teachings of the Church remain true whether her members practice it or not.

 

[jaybo]

Therefore we are forced to ask whether it in fact does the deeds of Christ or is as you say, a club. Do you believe the Catholic Church has throughout times past always done the things that Christ would do?

Such as indulgences, the Inquisition, pedophilia, and other violations of Christ's teachings?

 

[Walpole]

I am done discussing this with you. You have your mind set and aren't willing to pay attention to sound reasoning.

1) You deliberately fail to understand the difference between "catholic" and "Catholic". One is an adjective, the other is the name of a denomination.

FYI, there were no minuscule letters in Greek until well toward the end of the first millennium. The entire New Testament was written in majuscule letters.

2) The reason that all Protestants aren't Lutherans is that Lutheranism is, like Catholicism, a denomination. (Neither Catholicism nor Lutheranism are mentioned in Scripture.)

Once again, the Church is not a denomination. Denominationalism began with Protestantism and has as its root the act of dividing. By the very end of the 16th century (in which Luther lived), astonishingly there are already nearly 300 different Protestant sects, as they began dividing almost immediately over doctrinal differences.

The Catholic Church is not divided against herself.

3) In Jesus' high priestly prayer, he prays, "And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one." (John 17:11) All Catholics should read this instead of claiming that Catholics are the one true church; it applies to all those who believe in Christ.

John 17:6-13, " “I have revealed your name to the men you gave me out of the world. They belonged to you, and you gave them to me, and they have obeyed your word. Now they understand that everything you have given me comes from you, because I have given them the words you have given me. They accepted them and really understand that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me. I am praying on behalf of them. I am not praying on behalf of the world, but on behalf of those you have given me, because they belong to you. Everything I have belongs to you, and everything you have belongs to me, and I have been glorified by them. I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them safe in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one just as we are one. When I was with them I kept them safe and watched over them in your name that you have given me. Not one of them was lost except the one destined for destruction, so that the scripture could be fulfilled.But now I am coming to you, and I am saying these things in the world, so they may experience my joy completed in themselves."

You wrote, "Jesus founded ONE Church, not multiple sects with competing and contradictory teachings." I find this tragically amusing, as it is the Catholic church that claims to be the one true church. There is no mention of the Catholic church in Scripture!!! (How many times must I say this?)

Here it is...again...

The word "Catholic" comes from two Greek words:
---> καθ (katah) - Meaning throughout; according to
---> ολης (holos) - All; whole; completely

In Acts 9:31, it states:

Αἱ μὲν οὖν ἐκκλησίαι καθ᾽ ὅλης τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ Γαλιλαίας καὶ Σαμαρείας εἶχον εἰρήνην οἰκοδομουμέναι καὶ πορευομέναι τῷ φόβῳ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ τῇ παρακλήσει τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπληθύνοντο


I am still waiting for you to refute this etymology and offer a different one for the word "catholic."

Finally, you're saying that it is the Catholic Church which actually unites Protestantism is the most bizarre thing I have read in a long time.

Since your mind is closed to all but Catholic dogma, I am done trying to reason with you.

You clearly missed my point. Protestantism is defined by its protest of the Church. It is the only unifying thing amongst all the different denominations. Paradoxically, it is a powerful expression of how the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church projects her oneness even onto her adversaries.

 

[WIP]

The Catholic Church is not divided against herself.

Is the Eastern Orthodox Catholic church no longer in existence? Last I heard there has been some effort to reunite the east and west back into full communion but I'm not sure that has yet happened.

 

[Serving Zion]

I think you are conflating the teaching authority of the Church with the sinfulness of particular individual members, of which I am one.

The faith and teachings of the Church remain true whether her members practice it or not.

In saying that, you have to believe that every doctrine of the church has been decided by people who were not sinning at the time, wouldn't you?

 

[Serving Zion]

Such as indulgences, the Inquisition, pedophilia, and other violations of Christ's teachings?

Yes I had in mind the burning of heretics, actually. You can't really put that down to a few rogue sinners...

 

[Walpole]

Is the Eastern Orthodox Catholic church no longer in existence? Last I heard there has been some effort to reunite the east and west back into full communion but I'm not sure that has yet happened.

Yes, the Eastern Orthodox Church is very much in existence.

They are not in full communion though.

 

[Walpole]

In saying that, you have to believe that every doctrine of the church has been decided by people who were not sinning at the time, wouldn't you?

Personal impeccability is not a requirement to teach the faith. If it was, the faith would have died out long ago!

 

[Walpole]

Yes I had in mind the burning of heretics, actually. You can't really put that down to a few rogue sinners...

Whenever this topic is introduced, I often find most people simply do not know history. The Church had no authority to execute anyone for heresy. Rather, in medieval Europe, the state ruled by what they believed were Divine right (even Protestant sovereigns). Therefore they believed heresy was an act of sedition, which was therefore punishable as a capital crime. Even in a few Western countries today, sedition is still punishable as a capital crime. The Church's mandate is to teach truth and to sanctify. The State looked to the Church to determine what was or was not the truth of the faith. Because heresy was a seditious act, it threatening the State and the eternal salvation of the citizenry. It is the State's mandate to safeguard the common good of its citizenry and the Church was merely used by the State to determine if one was a heretic or not.

It's important to remember that capital punishment was much more widely used in the Middle Ages than it is today. We must be careful not to use a 21st century juridical mindset to judge medieval Europe. If you want to discuss whether the State's prosecution of heresy was ineffective, that's a valid position (and one to which I would agree). However, that's about the extent of any argument you can put forth when it comes to the topic. It's an argument one would have to put forth against all states in the Middle Ages, including Protestant ones. If you are going to judge medieval Catholic states for punishing heresy as an act of sedition, you must also do so with Protestant states, less you would be guilty of a double-standard.

Google "German Peasants War of 1524" to see the connection between heresy and sedition in Protestantism. Or, if you would like to read more about it, I recommend Harvard Divinity School's Mark Edwards' Printing, Propoganda and Martin Luther and Notre Dame's Brad Gregory's Salvation at Stake. Both are great works.

 

[jaybo]

Yes I had in mind the burning of heretics, actually. You can't really put that down to a few rogue sinners...

Yes, I forgot about that form of Catholicism.

 

[Serving Zion]

The State looked to the Church to determine what was or was not the truth of the faith. Because heresy was a seditious act, it threatening the State and the eternal salvation of the citizenry.

It's a repeat of what the Jews did to Jesus "you would have no power over me unless it were given from above. Therefore the one who has handed me over to you has the greater sin".

We must be careful not to use a 21st century juridical mindset to judge medieval Europe.

I'm judging it by the Christian mindset given by Jesus Christ: "he who lives by the sword shall fall by the sword", and "whenever you were doing it to even the least of these, my brothers and sisters, you were doing it to me".

If you are going to judge medieval Catholic states for punishing heresy as an act of sedition, you must also do so with Protestant states, less you would be guilty of a double-standard.

If only it weren't needed...

Google "German Peasants War of 1524" to see the connection between heresy and sedition in Protestantism. Or, if you would like to read more about it, I recommend Harvard Divinity School's Mark Edwards' Printing, Propoganda and Martin Luther and Notre Dame's Brad Gregory's Salvation at Stake. Both are great works.

Thanks, that's good information.

 

[GodsGrace]

"Every denomination I know of adds things to what scripture says..." Such as..?

I don't believe I replied to this post.....

Yes. Every denomination I know of adds things to what the bible says:

Word of Faith: We ask for something, God gives it to us. He heals us of everything. He makes us rich if we donate to the church,,,,etc.

Hyper Grace: We don't need to do anything. Jesus did it all. Works are an affront to God and some say they are a sin!

A of G: I like this denomination...but they say one has to speak in tongues as proof that they have received the Holy Spirit.

Nazarene: I like this denomination...but they believe that one can live a sinless life (this might have changed)....

I don't know enough about the other denominations to comment....

"Who do you think put the bible together anyway? It was the Catholic church in the 300's." Are you joking? The Bible existed long before the Catholic church -- centuries before. The last "book" of the Bible was written by John in approximately 90 CE. The Old Testament was in existence centuries before that. The Catholic church determined the canon of Scripture, even though not everyone agrees with the decision.

No Jaybo., I'm not joking.
Letters existed....the bible did not. (the New Testament). I never mentioned the O.T. because that DID exist before the universal, or Catholic Church.

Since we're all using the books the CC canonized - I'd have to say that we do agree.
Protestantism removed some books from the N.T. because they had scripture that did not agree with their beliefs.

"... sola scripture is NOT all we know about what Jesus taught". What else do "we know" about what Jesus taught (outside of Scripture)?

We know what the Apostles were taught - not everything is in the N.T.
John 21:25
25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they were written in detail, I expect that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

The Apostles passed this information on to the Apostolic Fathers....
They passed this information on to the Early Church Fathers...
By this time the church was called the Catholic Church.


110 AD

The first use of the term "Catholic Church" (literally meaning "universal church") was by the church father Saint Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50–140)* in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans (circa 110 AD).

You might want to read the entire article:

Catholic (term) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

* St. Ignatius of Antioch learned from Peter and John.

There is a logical contradiction here: the Catholic church determined the canon of Scripture -- what is authentic -- but you say there is more that Jesus taught? Recorded by whom? And if so, why do you consider those things to be authoritative?

Answered above.

The Catholic church has throughout its history added many things to the Bible. None of which are (obviously) scriptural. No Pope, no Catholic church, no separate priesthood, no worshiping Mary and/or saints, etc.

You're right about this...
everything had a reason which it believed to be correct.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

St Augustine of Hippo says the catholic church is okay
They even made him a church father and saint
Can't argue with Augustine

 

[GodsGrace]

True - but in Massachusetts I'm a Catholic legally (for purposes of adoption, and religious status), being in the Catholic baptismal records.

No, I'm NOT a "Practicing Catholic", and never was. Dad was a Christmas and Easter Catholic, and Mom was a Born Again Baptist (a "Mixed Marriage" in Massachusetts). they settled the issue by being neither, and were married by a JP in Vermont. The Carabbio family, of course wouldn't accept the marriage (only a marriage in a Catholic CHurch was valid in those days), so they got RE-Married the "Right way", so that I wouldn't be a Bastard. They had to promise to raise me Catholic - but fortunately, they didn't.


Well, there's praying to Saints, The Whole Marian mess, the lie that a Priest can "Forgive sins not committed against himself", Purgatorial Sanctification, Transsubstantiation, MORTAL and Venial SIN, Infant Baptism, to name a few.

Catholic persons pray to saints. This is not encouraged. I was never told to teach children to pray to saints, but only to God and through Jesus.
The following is the only reference I can find regarding this in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

2683 The witnesses who have preceded us into the kingdom, especially those whom the Church recognizes as saints, share in the living tradition of prayer by the example of their lives, the transmission of their writings, and their prayer today. They contemplate God, praise him and constantly care for those whom they have left on earth. When they entered into the joy of their Master, they were "put in charge of many things." Their intercession is their most exalted service to God's plan. We can and should ask them to intercede for us and for the whole world.

However, the Catholic church does not find a problem with prayers to those already departed.

For those interested:

Catholic Answers:

Why Do Catholics Pray to Saints?

The historic practice of asking saints in heaven for their intercession is questioned by many. Explore the common arguments and the Catholic beliefs.

www.catholic.com

But the Catholics believe the Works CONTRIBUTE to their salvation, which is not Biblical.

When a Person is Born Again of the Holy SPirit, they will be CHANGED, and as a RESULT of their salvation, there will be good works as the fruit of that relationship. The "Works", however are not salvific.

This is often debated...even here on our forum.
I believe good deeds are a requirement for continued salvation.
I believe they are salvific -- Jesus said so.

John 12:47-50
47 I will not judge those who hear me but don’t obey me, for I have come to save the world and not to judge it.
48 But all who reject me and my message will be judged on the day of judgment by the truth I have spoken.
49 I don’t speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it.
50 And I know his commands lead to eternal life; so I say whatever the Father tells me to say.”


Luke 6:46
“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?"


It is useless to call Jesus Lord UNLESS we obey Him.

ONLY because they've gotten their ears pinned back a few times (Like recently when they found recently that they weren't "Above the law" with their sexually predatory priests (that they used to shuffle around to keep 'em hidden).

Agreed.

Luther, after all WAS a EDUCATED and ORDAINED Catholic Priest in good standing, before God started opening his eyes to what was going on in his beloved church. That Tetzel was doing his thing was a red flag, and the corruption of the Pope (Leo X) at the time didn't help either.

Agreed.

I've often said that the Reformation was necessary ---
but look what it's brought us?
Hundreds of denominations....
This cannot be what Jesus wanted...
Men are corrupt....

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

St Anthony holding the baby Jesus.
One of my favorites.

 

[GodsGrace]

There is potential for good value in the answering of this question:

I'd like to know your thoughts.

I agree with you...
I replied to jaybo.
Please see my post to him no. 93....
It answers the question as to whom the authority of the church was given from the time of Jesus.

I find it incredible that some know nothing of church history.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

I agree with you...
I replied to jaybo.
Please see my post to him no. 93....
It answers the question as to whom the authority of the church was given from the time of Jesus.

I find it incredible that some know nothing of church history.

St Augustine had authority.
You like him?

 

[GodsGrace]

All you need to do is to compare the doctrines and practices of both the RCC and hyper-Calvinism, and then make up your own mind. It's all to do with whether we take the New Testament as the sole definitive standard of what Christianity actually is, or whether we decide to include traditional beliefs and practices that have arisen since the New Testament was completed.

We'd have to discuss the traditional beliefs and practices...
Some I cannot agree with.

In its rush to dismiss everything Catholic, the reformers changed everything that was known till that time.
Some practices did need to be abolished --- I do believe others were abolished for the sole purpose of denying agreement with the CC.
Then we got "Calvinism" out of this, and it was so wrong and damaging that most did not agree with its doctrine and more and more different denominations came into existence. I believe Zwingli started this....can't remember very well. I do know that splits began immediately.

So, yes, I'd agree that the bible should be the number 1 authority....
But, apparently, we have a problem with deciding which verse means what.

I also believe that, if there is some debate, we should go to the writings of the Apostolic and ECFs since they knew the Apostles and surely learned what they knew from them.

IOW...maybe not everything is in the N.T.?
Again, I post
John 21:25
25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

 

[GodsGrace]

St Augustine had authority.
You like him?

NO!
He changed important doctrine and the church let him.
I believe it was because he was so good at keeping heresy out of the church....
He invented Original Sin as being imputed to each person born.
This made infant baptism necessary.
He brought with him, from manechaeism, the idea of the absence of free will.
This caused John Calvin to formulate, in detail, the reformed idea of T.U.L.I.P.