A Historical Dare to Protestants

[CHESTERTONRULES]

How can you ever reconcile that The Church is not what you have been taught iit is?

Sounds exactly like the Catholic Church to me!

ekklesia

1)an assembly of Christians gathered for worship in a religious meeting
2)a company of Christian, or of those who, hoping for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ, observe religious rites, hold religious meetings, and manage affairs according to regulations prescribed for the body for order’s sake
3)those who anywhere, in a city, village, constitute such a company and are united into one body
4)the whole body of Christians scattered throughout the earth
5)the assembly of faithful Christians already dead and received into heaven

 

[Hisalone]

One of the four marks of the true Chruch is unity. That’s a theological fact. Your inablitiy to reconcile that fact with other Protestants shows that Protestant theology is defective. But then, with no authoritative structure within Protestantism to settle the issue, this is to expected

The unity we have is in Christ.
It is you who have divided.
Marion doctrine divides.
Papal infallibility divides.
Purgatory divides.

All nonbiblical doctrine which you insist upon which divides the body of Christ.

 

[MrS]

I try, but when being nice and outgoing is responded to with sneers and bites, it gets harder to not get frustrated

And secondly, I use the term “Roman-Catholic” to set what you call the “Catholic” church apart from what I call the “Church Catholic”, which is the universal community of ALL believers.

I think God might understand best what is [1] Truth and discussion given with the intent to present the truth… and [2] your thinking that it is sneers and bites., Your youth exposes you and that is a reality, not a slam.

I will be charitable… if you understand that charity is not condoning misstatements about the Catholic Church. Others who are simply viewing this thread MUST see the Church defended… even if it means rejecting your beliefs.

By the way, you share a birthday with one of my seven sons… so you can’t be all that bad

There are innumberable threads here at CAF that include the posts of non-Catholics making statements about what the Catholic Church believes. That is okay if the statements are fully and quickly addresed.

In my own experience, I often see a common denominator whereby the non-Catholic says or implies “… you can’t be right, because then I would be wrong…”

ACTS decribes the early Church as The Way. Ignatius calls it the Catholic Church less than 70 years after the Crucifixtion, and less than a decade after the death of John.

I ask you to find me any evidence of any Church in the first century that preceeded the designation of the Catholic Church… much less one that exists today other than the Catholic Church… with all its Doctrines unchanged.

(Doctrines, not disciplines) (unchanged, not unrecognized, or unexplained)

.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

The unity we have is in Christ.
It is you who have divided.
Marion doctrine divides.
Papal infallibility divides.
Purgatory divides.

All nonbiblical doctrine which you insist upon which divides the body of Christ.

Are the Assemblies of God, Reformed Baptists, Quakers, and Anglicans united in the truth of Christ?

Just because you don’t accept the biblical basis for the above doctrines doesn’t mean that they are nonbiblical.

 

[MrS]

The unity we have is in Christ.
It is you who have divided.
Marion doctrine divides.
Papal infallibility divides.
Purgatory divides.

All nonbiblical doctrine which you insist upon which divides the body of Christ.

This may be off topic… but can you explain papal infallibility??

And can you show me why or where Scripture teaches that all Truth is contained in Scripture?

.

 

[Hisalone]

Are its teaching in accordance with Scripture??? Are you suggesting that Scripture predates the Church?

There is the big distinction. The Bible, Scripture, is the book of the Catholic Church. The Holy Spirit, as promised, will guide those chosen into all Truth… as Jesus told the Apostles. And this guidance of the Holy Spirit includes the inspiration to write down the Truths presented in Scripture… canonized by only the Catholic Church… and properly interpreted only by the Catholic Church… for all, universally, to accept or reject.

The Church is the Pillar of Truth, not the Bible… and the Bible, the Book of the Catholic Church… affirms this.

As to the spiritual unity between all believers… agreed.

If you do not believe ALL of John, including John 6, you simply have walked away as they did when the Words were first spoken. That would not sound to me like one is a real believer… but rather a real selector.

I feel for those, including many in my own family, who love the Lord but have chosen to either walk away, or to prefer the private interpretations of their pastors, founders, leaders, etc.

How fortunate I am to be given, and to have accepted, the gift of the Catholic Church, with all its Truths, all its problems, all its sinners… all overshadowed by the Real Presence.

.

Seriously how can anyone bring reason to this discussion
Scripture is thousands of years older thean the roman Church,

 

[With_Questions]

No, they can’t, because they came out of the Catholic Church. The early eastern patriarchs recognized the primacy of Peter and the papacy.

That happens to be your spin. Now have read a little bit of Orthodoxy and I know that they disagree with you.

So if by some miracle I were to see the light and come to the conclusion that one and only one denomination must be the church of Jesus Christ, I would get myself totally confused as to what denomination that would be.

And at some point in my confusion I would sanity check myself and ask again, whether I am correct in determining that one denomination and one denomination only is the church. Because it would be darned near impossible to figure out with any degree of certainty what church that is if I fairly give equal weight to all competing claims.

Yes it does. Either Jesus allowed the apostles to teach error or the Catholic Church is true.

False choice. There are other logical alternatives other than the two that you are presenting to me.

 

[MrS]

Seriously how can anyone bring reason to this discussion
Scripture is thousands of years older thean the roman Church,

duh

Scripture includes the OT and the NT, unless you belong to the Church of Christ.

And St Paul, the Catholic Apostle to the Gentiles, and the 2nd most volumenous writer in the NT, did not exist thousands of years before he coverted to the Church.

 

[MrS]

Originally Posted by CHESTERTONRULES forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Yes it does. Either Jesus allowed the apostles to teach error or the Catholic Church is true.

False choice. There are other logical alternatives other than the two that you are presenting to me.

and they might be… ??

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

That happens to be your spin. Now have read a little bit of Orthodoxy and I know that they disagree with you.

.

As do the protestants.

However, they can’t change the writings of their partiarchs:

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus in Syria (450):

A native of Antioch, Theodoret ruled under the Antiochean Patriarch.

The great foundation of the Church was shaken, and confirmed by the Divine grace. And the Lord commanded him to apply that same care to the brethren. ‘And thou,’ He says, ‘converted, confirm thy brethren.’ (Theodoret, Tom. iv. Haeret. Fab. lib. v.c. 28)

‘For as I,’ He says, ‘did not despise thee when tossed, so be thou a support to thy brethren in trouble, and the help by which thou was saved do thou thyself impart to others, and exhort them not while they are tottering, but raise them up in their peril. For this reason I suffer thee also to slip, but do not permit thee to fall, thus through thee gaining steadfastness for those who are tossed.’ So this great pillar supported the tossing and sinking world, and permitted it not to fall entirely and gave it back stability, having been ordered to feed God’s sheep. (Theodoret, Oratio de Caritate in J. P. Minge, ed., Partrologiae Curses Completus: Series Graeca).

Emperor Justinian (520-533)

Writing to the Pope, …

Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches. (Justinian Epist. ad. Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. I. tit. 1).

St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (c. 638):

Teaching us all orthodoxy and destroying all heresy and driving it away from the God-protected halls of our holy Catholic Church. And together with these inspired syllables and characters, I accept all his (the pope’s) letters and teachings as proceeding from the mouth of Peter the Coryphaeus, and I kiss them and salute them and embrace them with all my soul … I recognize the latter as definitions of Peter and the former as those of Mark, and besides, all the heaven-taught teachings of all the chosen mystagogues of our Catholic Church. (Sophronius, Mansi, xi. 461)

St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (c. 387):

Peter himself the Head or Crown of the Apostles, the First in the Church, the Friend of Christ, who received a revelation, not from man, but from the Father, as the Lord bears witness to him, saying, ‘Blessed art thou, &c.’ This very Peter and when I name Peter I name that unbroken Rock, that firm Foundation, the Great Apostle, First of the disciples, the First called, and the First who obeyed he was guilty …even denying the Lord." (Chrysostom, T. ii. Hom)

Peter, the Leader of the choir of Apostles, the Mouth of the disciples, the Pillar of the Church, the Buttress of the faith, the Foundation of the confession, the Fisherman of the universe. (Chrysostom, T. iii Hom).

Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles, that Head of the brotherhood, that one set over the entire universe, that Foundation of the Church. (Chrys. In illud hoc Scitote)

Macedonius, Patriarch of Constantinople (466-516)

Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon, that ‘such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.’ (Macedonius, Patr. Graec. 108: 360a (Theophan. Chronogr. pp. 234-346 seq.)

 

[With_Questions]

Originally Posted by CHESTERTONRULES forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Yes it does. Either Jesus allowed the apostles to teach error or the Catholic Church is true.

and they might be… ??

Oh some that come to mind off the top of my head are…

(1) The church at the time of the apostles is not exclusively the Catholic church to the exclusion of everybody else
(2) The Catholic church began to teach error after the apostles
(3) When the church divided upon itself, no one denomination after the division after the various splits possessed the “fulness of truth” to the exclusion of everybody else.

 

[With_Questions]

As do the protestants.

However, they can’t change the writings of their partiarchs:

You want me to believe the Orthodox can’t quote their patriarchs for themselves.

Why should I listen to you tell me what the Orthodox believe?

 

[christian77]

No problem:

1 Tim 2
3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

Matt 22
37Jesus replied: " ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38This is the first and greatest commandment.

St. Augustine

But since there are some persons who so defend God’s grace as to deny man’s free will, or who suppose that free will is denied when grace is defended, I have determined to write somewhat on this point.

Now He has revealed to us, through His Holy Scriptures, that there is in a man a free choice of will. But how He has revealed this I do not recount in human language, but in divine. There is, to begin with, the fact that God’s precepts themselves would be of no use to a man unless he had free choice of will, so that by performing them he might obtain the promised rewards.

What is the import of the fact that in so many passages God requires all His commandments to be kept and fulfilled? How does He make this requisition, if there is no free will? What means the happy man, of whom the Psalmist says that his will has been the law of the Lord? Does he not clearly enough show that a man by his own will takes his stand in the law of God? Then again, there are so many commandments which in some way are expressly adapted to the human will; for instance, there is, Be not overcome of evil, Romans 12:1 and others of similar import, such as, Be not like a horse or a mule, which have no understanding; and, Reject not the counsels of your mother; Proverbs 1:8 and, Be not wise in your own conceit; Proverbs 3:7 and, Despise not the chastening of the Lord; Proverbs 3:11 and, Forget not my law; Proverbs 3:1 and, Forbear not to do good to the poor; Proverbs 3:27 and, Devise not evil against your friend; Proverbs 3:29 and, Give no heed to a worthless woman; Proverbs 5:2 and, He is not inclined to understand how to do good; and, They refused to attend to my counsel; Proverbs 1:30 with numberless other passages of the inspired Scriptures of the Old Testament.

Oh, the issues go way beyond what you have posted. We need to explore all that is written in the Scirptures on the topic, which goes beyond the thread topic. Are you saying Augustine was a semi-pelagius in his theology…LOL!

 

[SD_Catholic]

Oh some that come to mind off the top of my head are…

(1) The church at the time of the apostles is not exclusively the Catholic church to the exclusion of everybody else
(2) The Catholic church began to teach error after the apostles
(3) When the church divided upon itself, no one denomination after the division after the various splits possessed the “fulness of truth” to the exclusion of everybody else.

1. sure… if they choose to join the Church Jesus established and the Apostles grew.
2. then why do you trust your soul to the Bible when the men who decided went in to it were teaching error
3. I would say any church that splits from the one started by Christ would be the one in error

SD

 

[MrS]

Oh some that come to mind off the top of my head are…

(1) The church at the time of the apostles is not exclusively the Catholic church to the exclusion of everybody else
(2) The Catholic church began to teach error after the apostles
(3) When the church divided upon itself, no one denomination after the division after the various splits possessed the “fulness of truth” to the exclusion of everybody else.

[1] The Church is perfect, not necessarily the people in it The Church does NOT exclude anyone. They exclude themselves with their own free will. There was NO other Church at the time of the Apostles. If the individual “churches”, what we refer to today as a diocese, were not in union with the bishop(s) they were not part of the Church… see ACTS

[2] What Doctrine of the Catholic Church has ever been changed? Doctrine is Truth for all Christians in all ages. If a particular 'leader" teaches error, he is corrected… as the early Church did often with the rising heresies and dissent. The important thing to recognize is that the Catholic Church, and its Doctrines, survive… often in spite of the leaders in the Church… not so with any other faith community.

[3] The Catholic Church does. And only the Catholic Church does. Not one protestant faith community makes that claim… they know better. They have one thing in common… anybody but Bush,…oops, I mean anybody but the Catholic.

 

[SD_Catholic]

The unity we have is in Christ.
It is you who have divided.
Marion doctrine divides.
Papal infallibility divides.
Purgatory divides.

All nonbiblical doctrine which you insist upon which divides the body of Christ.

By who’s standards do these things divide? Is it possible you already have your mind made up before reading or researching a topic… and no matter how much evidence or history there is to support a belief you will refuse to accept it because it is not in line with what you already believe… Instead of trying to teach us Scripture and history why don’t you let Scripture and history teach you?

SD

 

[jenlovesyu]

I’m jumping into this a little late, but I thought I would leave some food for thought

Let’s break down the logic here. We can assume from logic that everyone can not be right. Every single church or “denomination” that bears the name of Christ on its building can NOT be right. It is impossible. Illogical.

Why? Well obviously they are all different. Some people like to claim that the differences are very minor but I have experienced the differences firsthand and they are anything BUT minor.

For example, some “denominations” believe that baptism is necessary for salvation, some do not. Some believe that homosexual acts are an abomination, some do not. Some believe that artificial contraceptives are evil (if they are used to separate sex from procreation), some do not. Some believe divorce is okay in some (not so dire) situations, some do not. I hope you get the point. These aren’t just little things we can dismiss.

I am sure we have all heard the “one faith, one baptism” phrase over and over but try and really read it this time. One faith, not two, not twenty, not twenty-thousand, but ONE.

AND, if none of the denominations are correct, then that leaves us with only two conclusions (dare I say): Our God is not perfect or God does not care what we do or believe.
gasps Surely we don’t wish to believe this but to say that no church/faith is founded by our Lord is to say that the Holy Spirit divides people and creates chaos. I thought the only being who does these horrible things was Satan

Sola Scriptura did not come into play until about 1500 years after the onset of Christianity. Did Martin Luther and the other men claim to have revelations from God? Even if they did, didn’t our Lord say there will be no more public revelations? Could these men possibly be the “false prophets” that our very own Christ spoke of? Hold on, the NT wasn’t even written in the first few decades after Christ’s ministry and ascension into Heaven! The culture of Jesus’ time was mostly an oral culture! Oh my what an epiphany!

Forgive me for sounding sarcastic. This is just how I realized that being Protestant just wouldn’t cut it anymore. I am now on my way Home

 

[With_Questions]

1. sure… if they choose to join the Church Jesus established and the Apostles grew.

Just because you say you are doesn’t make it so.

1. then why do you trust your soul to the Bible when the men who decided went in to it were teaching error

I trust my soul to the Lord Jesus Christ. Acts says believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and Thou shalt be saved.

1. I would say any church that splits from the one started by Christ would be the one in error
   SD

And that would be your opinion. Just because you say so doesn’t make it so.

 

[SD_Catholic]

Forgive me for sounding sarcastic. This is just how I realized that being Protestant just wouldn’t cut it anymore. I am now on my way Home

Good post:thumbsup: … May God continue to bless you on your journey home!

SD

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

You want me to believe the Orthodox can’t quote their patriarchs for themselves.

Why should I listen to you tell me what the Orthodox believe?

I didn’t tell you what they believed, I gave you direct quotes.

You are free to ignore them.