A Historical Dare to Protestants

[stbruderklaus]

I see brother, I have a question: do you pray or believe in the Rosary?

Yes, I do. Perhaps not as regularly as I would like, but I try to at least once per week… usually on Fridays.

Might be better for a private conversation, but I believe our family had a very direct–if very brief-- encounter with our Blessed Mother, and perceive a very strong maternal link to her as priest in Christ’s Church.

Peace.

 

[stbruderklaus]

Good questions, but to refute the first thing you said; the Eucharist is a scientific fact. Did you not know the Bread did change into real flesh to a doubtful priest? Have you never heard of the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano? Let give you some FACTS about it. (Im quoting from a book I have.)

1. The blood of the Eucharistic Miracle is real blood and Flesh is real flesh.
2. The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue from a heart (myocardium)
3. The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.
   4)The blood type is identical in the Blood and in the Flesh and this very probably indicates that the source is a single person, although there remains a possibility they could have come from two different persons with identical blood type.
4. In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic composition of fresh, normal blood.
5. In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium in reduced quantity, whereas calcium was found in larger quantity.

The well-known scientists, enlarging on these conclusions, affirmed that-
a) for the Flesh, origin by anatomic dissection from an existing human heart is impossible:
b) no chemical process of preservation was ever employed to conserve the Flesh and the Blood.

These are real scientists examining this Miracle, so nobody can say the Eucharist is not scientific. It is. But then again, God is not going to perform miracles over and over again, because at the end of the day, what we accept is still going to be a matter of faith. Because God wants us to choose to believe rather than being convinced by His work.

With that being said, what gives us the right to break the sucesion of the apostles who walked, slept, ate, drank, spoke, with Jesus? If Holy Orders was important in the 1st century, why would it be not so important now? If God talked about A gathering of people (aka Church) why are you trying to say gatherings of people (aka churches) is okay? Jesus apointed one Holy Apostolic Church, this gives nobody a right to break off the succesion thus, gives nobody authority to some sacraments. I never said, a protestant has no authority to preach the bible, they even the authority to baptize in the name of The Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. But as far other Sacraments are concerned, only the Catholic Church has authority over them.

I would like to read this book-- could you give the title and author?

As for the validity or legitimacy of the Sacraments, the movement of the Spirit of God has certainly remained among many of the non-Roman Christian communions; i.e., the Roman Church discusses the validity of the Eucharist and Confirmation and other Sacraments in the Orthodox communions, and is somewhat convinced of them in Lutheran and Anglican communions, Old Catholic and others who either have retained or repaired their Apostolic Succession. However, I would also offer for our Christian brethren outside these historic lines, that the Sacraments are works of the Spirit of God rather than the works of men, so while Rome may doubt their validity due to their own cannonical regulations, I think it unwise to pressume that the Spirit of God is not doing what is necessary among the other Christians in their seperated communions.

There’s a difference between validity and whether a thing is licit or not. Might be a discussion for another forum.

Peace.

 

[Katrina5]

you are forgeting the historical fact that the Catholic Church predates scripture. Roman Catholicism is NOT a denomination. Chrisitianity is Catholism - Catholism is Christianity. Remember the letter from 107 AD when the saint used the adjective? well…notice how there is no evidence that anybody ever looked at word as something new. So how come the letter has no effect on naming the Christian Church? Because the adjective Catholic is propably even older then 107AD. Making it even older then Holy Scripture.

Europe was called Christendom before the Reformation.
(Not Catholicdom).
The point I was trying to make when I said my friend told a Muslim that Catholic church is “just another denomination” was her total lack of what she was telling a person who isn’t even Christian.
Saying we are “just another denomination” is like lumping us in with other groups who have splintered off. We didn’t splinter off, and we weren’t “reformed” by the Reformation!
One of my friends attended a Jewish class for awhile. She noticed that the rabbi called all Christians “Catholics”. Once he was talking about a Pentecostal Protestant church and kept saying it was Catholic. She corrected him. He really didn’t know there was any difference.
Many people think Evangeligal Protestants are Catholic.
The rabbi also said in class that Catholics don’t believe the angels were created by God, that we believe humans turn into angels when we die. Turns out that he had watched “It’s a Wonderful Life” and learned his “Catholic theology” from it!
I have a Jewish friend who said that as he was growing up the “Catholics” called him a “Christ-killer.” We are the same age, and I remember being taught that we do not consider the Jews Christ-killers. It’s ridiculous, and not true, and as we talked about it more, I found out that he wasn’t talking about Catholic kids at all, just some kids that went to Public School with him in the 1950’s.
So for someone who doesn’t know anything about the Catholic Faith to tell another person who doesn’t know anything about the Catholic Faith that we are “just another denomination,” yes, it made me angry.
And then to be criticised on this forum, assumed that I think Christ is saying “You go girl” is just nonsense.

 

[elvisman]

I agree…I as well believe there will be an absence of denominations is heaven. If you believe that only Catholics go to heaven you should believe the same. You won’t be a catholic in heaven you’ll be an angel. Will there be a need for a church in heaven? I don’t think so. To say that there will be denominations in heaven is like saying there will be sadness and pain as well. On earth we are not perfect. (therefore since we can’t agree on much of anything we have many religions)But in heaven we are perfected. And to say that all of the “denominations” lead away from God is in fact pretty funny. If that were the case no one would really care about Christ or “true religions” and you wouldn’t be in a huff about the whole debate. Those religions that broke off did so because of the legalism of other religions. They just wanted to get back to root of Christianity and that would be CHRIST. I spend time in my Bible because I am hungry for it. I go to church on Sunday because I like to reunion and worship with fellow saints. Not because I am afraid of going to hell because it is a mortal sin. For some people legaliam works. For others it is a distraction. As long as the focus is on the Creator and not on the creation who are you to judge?

Please don’t read attitude in my words. I am neither upset or frustrated. Just simply trying to voice an opinion. I would not be on this site if I wasn’t open minded.

You say you go to church and read the Bible, yet your profile says you adhere to “NO RELIGION”.

If you were familiar with the Scriptures, you would know that true religion is spoken of as "pure and undefiled before God." (James 1:26-27)

What church do you belong to?

 

[jblake]

Benjamin8o8;:

Meaning: The RCC is the Catholic Church that was established in AD33.

Timelines can be, and in the cited instance, are theologically biased.

Start with
33 AD: The church in Ethiopia was founded
52 AD: The church in Kerala was established
60 AD: The church in Lhassa was established.
70 AD(?) The church in what is now Tokyo was established.

And continue with the unsettling history of Christianity in Asia prior to the Fifteenth Century.

Just be sure to segregate out the history of 基督教, 天主教, and 景教. As a general rule of thumb, you want to study the latter, not the former.

On second thoughts, maybe the difference between 上帝, 天主, and 景教 covers it all.

jonathon

 

[Katrina5]

I agree…I as well believe there will be an absence of denominations is heaven. If you believe that only Catholics go to heaven you should believe the same. You won’t be a catholic in heaven you’ll be an angel. Will there be a need for a church in heaven? I don’t think so. To say that there will be denominations in heaven is like saying there will be sadness and pain as well. On earth we are not perfect. (therefore since we can’t agree on much of anything we have many religions)But in heaven we are perfected. And to say that all of the “denominations” lead away from God is in fact pretty funny. If that were the case no one would really care about Christ or “true religions” and you wouldn’t be in a huff about the whole debate. Those religions that broke off did so because of the legalism of other religions. They just wanted to get back to root of Christianity and that would be CHRIST. I spend time in my Bible because I am hungry for it. I go to church on Sunday because I like to reunion and worship with fellow saints. Not because I am afraid of going to hell because it is a mortal sin. For some people legaliam works. For others it is a distraction. As long as the focus is on the Creator and not on the creation who are you to judge?

Please don’t read attitude in my words. I am neither upset or frustrated. Just simply trying to voice an opinion. I would not be on this site if I wasn’t open minded.

THIS is where I find agreement…I don’t think there will be any denominations in heaven, either.
I DO believe that Christ died for all of us, even for people who are not Christian, and for all the people who lived before Christ came.
I am not judging anyone, and I fear that writing on forums, no matter how many smiley faces, etc we use, things get misinterpretted. (I know I verbally blasted jonathon, and yes I was in a huff. I’m sorry.)
I, too, go to Mass on Sunday because it brings me closer to God, through Christ. Not because it’s a mortal sin if I miss.
I do find that a beautiful Church is an “enhancement” for worship. I love the music, I love the “extras” that some churches have stripped away because they are distracting.

Therein lies the “style” issue…not sure I want to go there.

God gave us our gifts and talents, and as an artist, I find that when I am working on a piece, I feel a oneness with God, because I know He wants me to use the gifts that he gave me.
We visited many old Cathedrals in Europe, and I found every experience to be uplifting to the senses, which God gave us too. There are many ways to praise God, by giving back to Him what he gave us is one of them.
My sister’s Pentecostal church has a loud rock band and the sermon is the focus. It looks like an auditorium. Not my “style”.
What you said about being with other believers is true also. I want what we all want, to be with God in heaven, and to be reunited with my parents and loved ones.
We are all struggling, and none of us has the right answer.
So, no, I definitely don’t think there will only be Catholics in heaven! It’s the earthly experience I’m referring to, where we meet with God and fellow human beings, who he loves so much.
We all have a Faith Journey that is as unique as we are-- and while we disagree on some things, it seems we agree on more.
God bless you-- thanks for responding to my post.

 

[jblake]

elvisman;:

If that were true, you would have to call the “The Way” a denomination because

The Way calls itself a Christian denomination. Whether or not you agree with their theology is a separate issue. That they consider their theology to be Biblically justified is something you
can discern for yourself, by studing their theology. ( I expect you’ll have some theological issues with their view of other organisations — both Christian and non-Christian.)

those are denominations or “brands” of Christianity that didn’t accept the Universal Christian Church (Catholic) that Jesus set up as the “pillar and foundation of truth”

By that criteria Roman Catholicism is another denomination, because it utterly rejected the doctrines of the Univeral Church, by demanding — using force whenever, and wherever it could — that all and sundry submit to both their political and spiritual control. If that force included slaughtering women and children, well so be it. A theology that was rejected by the Desert Fathers.

jonathon

 

[jblake]

seekdatruth;:

What if all children were to have the right and ability to just up and leave their parents before they were of age, simply because they thought their parents were too strict?

Several states-- Washington State and Oregon, as examples — do give children that right. More precisely, the children can leave home for any reason.

The sad thing is, that most children that leave home, do so because it is safer for them to be on the streets, than to be at home.

jonathon

 

[Katrina5]

You say you go to church and read the Bible, yet your profile says you adhere to “NO RELIGION”.

If you were familiar with the Scriptures, you would know that true religion is spoken of as "pure and undefiled before God." (James 1:26-27)

What church do you belong to?

One of my friends distiguishes “religion” from “faith” and “spirituality”. She doesn’t like to be called “religious” because it smacks of “legalism”.
These distinctions are very important to her, and I think she gets sidelined by them. Her church has no Liturgy, no “Rituals” (a definite taboo!) no “sacraments”, no “priests”, no “Cross”, just the Bible and the Preacher.
At the same time, she is very rigid and what we used to call up-tight, at least during the week. On Sunday, at Church, she becomes filled with the spirit and is the exact opposite. Then that shuts back down when she leaves the church building.
But I digress. I believe we were getting off onto the word “religion” and how some people don’t want to ne called “religious”, because it is “legalistic.”

 

[jblake]

Benjamin8o8;:

Its good that you apologized but I have to admit, that was hilarious though.

I saw his comments as satire,not an outburst.

jonathon

 

[Katrina5]

I saw his comments as satire,not an outburst.

jonathon

Um, jonathon, I take responsibility for the satire and the outburst, but I’m not a “him”.

 

[Katrina5]

lol, no problem Reverend K.

Its good that you apologized but I have to admit, that was hilarious though.

Thank you! My sense of humor can be troublesome, but I love it when someone GETS it!

 

[jblake]

CHESTERTONRULES;:

The bible was compiled in its current form until almost 300 years later.

Both what books are to be included in the Bible, and when that Bible was compiled, literally depends upon which organization one is talking about.

Nicea had no effect on 景教. Whilst the absence of evidence is not proof, the the surviving manuscripts appear to be based upon a Canon other than that used by Catholic, or Orthodox Christianity. Hopefully, more funeral scrolls will be found, that have a more complete record of both the Scriptures, and commentaries from their viewpoint. (If, as some evidence suggest, 神道 is a descendant of Early Christianity, then their early manuscripts are also needed — especially if they discuss 景教.)

jonathon

 

[Matariel]

Let’s not forget, the Catholic Church (as well as the Oriental Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox) are pre-denominational.

Protestantism, Anglicanism, and Independent/Old/Jansenist Catholicism is divided into many different sects, call denominations.

So it’s improper to speak of the Catholic Church as a “denomination”, only as pre-denominational.

Sorry, but I’m techical. Can’t help it.

 

[elvisman]

The Way calls itself a Christian denomination. Whether or not you agree with their theology is a separate issue. That they consider their theology to be Biblically justified is something you
can discern for yourself, by studing their theology. ( I expect you’ll have some theological issues with their view of other organisations — both Christian and non-Christian.)

By that criteria Roman Catholicism is another denomination, because it utterly rejected the doctrines of the Univeral Church, by demanding — using force whenever, and wherever it could — that all and sundry submit to both their political and spiritual control. If that force included slaughtering women and children, well so be it. A theology that was rejected by the Desert Fathers.

jonathon

God’s church “utterly rejected” its own doctrines? Hogwash.
Political asp****irations of corrupt men are not doctrine.

Political aspirations of corrupt men associated with the Church doesn’t mean that “the Church” as a whole is responsible for their sins. If it were, all Fundamentalist and Evengelical Christians would be responsible for the sins of men like Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart and Ted Haggard and the countless ministers who are guilty of pedophilia and other sins. This is a silly and irresponsible notion to hold. It’s just as silly as saying the God’s Church is responsible for the sins of a few.

As for “the Way” - I’m not referring to the Protestant denomination of today. I’m referring to the early Church being referred to as “The Way” in Acts 18:26. Acts 24:22.

 

[With_Questions]

52 AD: The church in Kerala was established

Now I had never heard of Kerala, but google can be your friend.

You are absolutely right.

Here is an article about the Kerala church. And no it was not Catholic.

 

[jblake]

elvisman;:

were all part of the Catholic Church. They weren’t and still aren’t “different” Churches.

a) You do realize that both their theology and practices were different from that of Roman Catholcism;

b) The German Catholic Church that didn’t stay with Luther, changed their canon to be congruent with Luther’s Canon. (Wondering who else has read the book that Luther threw out of the Canon. You won’t find it in your Catholic, Anglican, or Orthodox Bible.)

c) You appear to have confused French Catholic Church with Roman Catholic Churches in France. Whilst both are loyal to the Pope, they are theologically and historically different. (My guess is that the French Catholic Church would just as soon everybody else forgot about them, and mistake them for a Roman Catholic Order.);

jonathon

 

[elvisman]

b) The German Catholic Church that didn’t stay with Luther, changed their canon to be congruent with Luther’s Canon. (Wondering who else has read the book that Luther threw out of the Canon. You won’t find it in your Catholic, Anglican, or Orthodox Bible.)

jonathon

Which book?

Also, any Church that claims to be Catholic and changes doctrines is NOT loyal to the Papacy or the Church. It’s an oxymoron to say you reject Catholic doctrine yet, are still loyal to the Church and the Pope.

There are a hundred or so “Catholic Churches” in the U.S today that claim to be Catholic but are not part of the Catholic Church at all because they have rejected doctrines or dogmas of the Church.

 

[mmplps7783]

Actually you would be a saint… angels were never human.

SD

True! My mistake:thumbsup:

 

[jblake]

Benjamin8o8;:

Give me evidence (where, and when) The Roman Catholic Church is an off-shoot instead of the Church that Peter THROUGH Christ established.

The Great Schism, when the Roman Catholic Church formally separated itself from Christianity, choosing to be its own denomination.

jonathon