L
- Status
M
mflorence
Guest
mflorence;6939509:
P
PJM
Guest
It means that:
- Christ did found a new Covenant / new Chruch and a New Faith [all SINGULAR]
- Futher God Himself gives HIMSELF as assurene that it will last until the End of Time
- And that Her Theachings on ALL matters of Faith and Morals cannot be in error; because He God will not allow it.
- Sechular Historians give evidence of this Church [known today as the Catholic Church,] which dates from the time of Christ of earth.
Love and prayers,
Pat
T
tabbey48
Guest
After all this discussion, is anyone convinced to become Catholic? Are any Catholics now ready to become Protestant?
A
AndrewF1995
Guest
The catholic church was in a very bad state when Luther broke away wasn’t it? So I guess there wasn’t NO reason at all. Well thats what I learned in school…
L
larkin31
Guest
A
Araninski
Guest
Yeah you are right, He founded His Church. All faithful believers are part of His Church. His Church is composed not only of good faithful Catholics, but also good faithful Christians from other denominations. So if you mean The Church being His Church (Christ’s) then you are correct.
M
mflorence
Guest
Nope - and I’m still not ready to join either of them, but I stop in and worship with them both from time to time, along with some non-Christian faiths too. I don’t have a church of my own, and you know, I’m pretty happy with that. As an outside observer it does make me a bit crestfallen to see all this fussing.
D
davec66
Guest
I thought this was a question for protestants.Yes, yes I do. One Church, with a hierarchy of Deacons, Priests, Bishops, founded upon Peter, continued through the centuries right up to Pope Benedict XVI today.
All others are (usually) well-meaning schismatics who have fragmented the Church Christ began.
I know that will sound offensive, but it is only one man’s opinion
FSC
Anyway, Yes, I believe that Jesus intended there should be only one church. Man wanting money and power corrupted the church. In the first century each church was independent of each other. Leaders were chosen by the members of each church as in Paul’s letter to Timothy. The church should be based only on the bible’s teaching not traditions and man’s additions. Jesus condemned the religious leaders of his day for putting traditions over the God’s teaching. We are saved by grace through our faith. We are not saved by works.
Now, is the church I attend perfect? No. It is made of of imperfect people like myself. However, we try to follow only what the bible says. Does that mean I don’t believe people of other denominations are saved? No. and I will leave it at that.
T
tabbey48
Guest
As an insider, I feel the same way!
B
BILL_PICK53
Guest
If you believe the Bible and Our Lord Jesus Christ,yes the only CHURCH is the Cathloic ChurchYes, yes I do. One Church, with a hierarchy of Deacons, Priests, Bishops, founded upon Peter, continued through the centuries right up to Pope Benedict XVI today.
All others are (usually) well-meaning schismatics who have fragmented the Church Christ began.
I know that will sound offensive, but it is only one man’s opinion
FSC
S
Soldier_X
Guest
Yep.
This thread has forced my hand. I’m going to take a cue from some of the “internet-only” Catholic and Orthodox schismatic sects, and start a website called the Catholic Protestant Anglo-Orthodox Church. Catholic will be capitalized in the title but not in the creed, just to cover all the bases. We will both affirm and deny our C/catholic heritage, and we will both recite and not recite the C/creed. This should make everyone happy.And yet, I have this sneaking suspicion that it won’t.
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Davec66,
Welcome to CAF! These are great forums.
I do believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, Catholic meaning Universal, in all times and all places.
I do believe the Church was built upon “Peter.” There are different interpretations regarding what this means exactly. The debate regarding the definition of the “primacy” of Peter has been going on for centuries. So, I doubt this will be resolved on this forum to the satisfaction of all parties.
You said, “The church should be based only on the bible’s teaching not traditions and man’s additions.”
The early church did not have a N.T. The teachings of Christ were initially handed down orally. The letters of Paul would have been read to the early Christians.
The N.T. does warn about the traditions of men; however, the Traditions of the Gospel were handed down through the early Church. The Early Church Fathers give us a window into the interpretations of the early Church, since they wrote before and after the N.T. Canon was fixed.
You quoted Scripture to discredit the role of “tradition” in the early Church. I would encourage you to consider Scripture as a whole. The early Christians were called to maintain the traditions delivered to them; to stand firm and hold to the traditions they were taught, either ***by spoken word ***or by letters; and to keep away from any brother who walked in idleness and not in accord with the tradition they received.
(Emphasis is mine.)
1 Corinthians 11 (English Standard Version): 1 Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. 2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God
2 Thessalonians 2: 14 To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.
2 Thessalonians 3: 5 May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and to the steadfastness of Christ. Warning Against Idleness 6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you,
Many Protestants claim they do not follow tradition; but that is really not the case. Every time a Bible class teacher or a minister teaches; they are giving an interpretation of Scripture, and that interpretation becomes tradition. It’s only a question of which traditions you accept: those of the early Church or those created in the last few centuries. IOW, traditions are inescapable.
Keep in mind that Martin Luther tried to remove James, Jude, Hebrews, and Revelation (if I recall correctly-I’m open to correction) from the Biblical Canon, because Luther believed they went against sola fide, sola scriptura, and other Protestant teachings.
T
tabbey48
Guest
Sadly, I suspect tht you are right.
In his book, A PITCHER OF CREAM, Uncle Bud Robinson wrote many years ago:
E
Eutychus123
Guest
Will you leave the 'filioque" in the creed?Yep.
And yet, I have this sneaking suspicion that it won’t.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
There are two types of tradition, divine and human.
Christ was accusing the pharisees of following human traditions to the point of being inhumane in themselves…the irony of it all…observing laws and denying one’s neighbor food, clothing, and love.
Divine Tradition is that handed down by the Word – not the letter, not books to pass out. There was no Bible in the first 300 years of Christianity. The New Testament itself is a Christian tradition. The Bible itself doesn’t tell you which books belong and which do not.
Tradition is the understanding of the Word of God drawn from the Oral Tradition of Jesus Christ handed to His apostles, secured by the Holy Spirit and passed on to their chosen successors.
About the primacy of the Papacy…A protestant theologian spent 27 years researching if the line of Peter had ever been broken. It has not. In ecclesial matters down through time, it has been Rome that the Holy Spirit always led ecclesiastics to recognize as having a matter rest. The Byzantine world had its own jurisdictions in that part of the Eastern world. We as Catholics draw on today the great spiritual gifts of the Eastern church.
Christ told Peter that what was to be bound on earth is bound in heaven. He gave Peter and the apostles the authority to build His church. We are bound in conscience to go to Mass on weekly Sunday Mass of the Resurrection and Holy Days, to go to sacramental confession if we commit mortal sins so we can be restored to sacramental Eucharist. Drawing from Christ we see human life and God’s creation as sacred. We have special option for the poor of this earth. We recognize some sins that cry out to heaven for God’s justice – the taking of innocent human life, the oppression of the poor, and a laborer receiving unjust wages.
It is the dictate of Christ in John 21:15-17, “There shall be one fold and one shepherd.”
The apostles from then on always had Peter as presiding their gatherings.
The papacy isn’t always right in its teaching. There was a recent pope who wrote an encyclical (not all encyclicals are equal in weight in truth either) dictating that all seminaries teach in Latin. It was ignored. It depends on what the pope is teaching. A pope may declare a Holy Year…and in that we are given special graces if we do certain prayers, make a pilgrimage to a holy site. If it is too far, our bishop will give us permission to go to a local site for the pilgrimage and yet we receive the same blessings and graces.
It is the Holy Spirit Who is teaching through the Church. When the Holy Father makes a decision based solely on faith and morals and is working in fullness for the entire universal faith, it is the Holy Spirit Who is working through the Holy Father. And because it is the Holy Spirit working through a teaching pronouncement for the entire world and it is directed at faith and morals…and comes from the development of faith around the world through the bishops and advisors – the pope is not reacting but drawing on the universal church, then through the work of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Father is divinely protected from error.
John Paul II opposed capital punishment. But he did not make an infallible statement and did not propose this conviction in union with all bishops in all churches in the world. That was his personal conviction. The Holy Father’s interpretation is strictly doctrinal. Christ called His followers to “hear the Church” (Matthew 18:17)…and would not want us to hear error.
We only have a few dogmas…3 dogmas ? out of 2,000 years…correct me anyone…
When someone goes to Mass a number of times, eventually one will be able to separate the local church from the universal faith…and when one begins to recognize the Holy Spirit speaking and working within the universal and apostolic faith at Mass and reception of the sacraments, one will find one’s self at the center of God…balanced and connected to all of His creation, the path now laid out to follow…we are pilgrims in this world…going forward together to Christ and to our heavenly home.
Christ was accusing the pharisees of following human traditions to the point of being inhumane in themselves…the irony of it all…observing laws and denying one’s neighbor food, clothing, and love.
Divine Tradition is that handed down by the Word – not the letter, not books to pass out. There was no Bible in the first 300 years of Christianity. The New Testament itself is a Christian tradition. The Bible itself doesn’t tell you which books belong and which do not.
Tradition is the understanding of the Word of God drawn from the Oral Tradition of Jesus Christ handed to His apostles, secured by the Holy Spirit and passed on to their chosen successors.
About the primacy of the Papacy…A protestant theologian spent 27 years researching if the line of Peter had ever been broken. It has not. In ecclesial matters down through time, it has been Rome that the Holy Spirit always led ecclesiastics to recognize as having a matter rest. The Byzantine world had its own jurisdictions in that part of the Eastern world. We as Catholics draw on today the great spiritual gifts of the Eastern church.
Christ told Peter that what was to be bound on earth is bound in heaven. He gave Peter and the apostles the authority to build His church. We are bound in conscience to go to Mass on weekly Sunday Mass of the Resurrection and Holy Days, to go to sacramental confession if we commit mortal sins so we can be restored to sacramental Eucharist. Drawing from Christ we see human life and God’s creation as sacred. We have special option for the poor of this earth. We recognize some sins that cry out to heaven for God’s justice – the taking of innocent human life, the oppression of the poor, and a laborer receiving unjust wages.
It is the dictate of Christ in John 21:15-17, “There shall be one fold and one shepherd.”
The apostles from then on always had Peter as presiding their gatherings.
The papacy isn’t always right in its teaching. There was a recent pope who wrote an encyclical (not all encyclicals are equal in weight in truth either) dictating that all seminaries teach in Latin. It was ignored. It depends on what the pope is teaching. A pope may declare a Holy Year…and in that we are given special graces if we do certain prayers, make a pilgrimage to a holy site. If it is too far, our bishop will give us permission to go to a local site for the pilgrimage and yet we receive the same blessings and graces.
It is the Holy Spirit Who is teaching through the Church. When the Holy Father makes a decision based solely on faith and morals and is working in fullness for the entire universal faith, it is the Holy Spirit Who is working through the Holy Father. And because it is the Holy Spirit working through a teaching pronouncement for the entire world and it is directed at faith and morals…and comes from the development of faith around the world through the bishops and advisors – the pope is not reacting but drawing on the universal church, then through the work of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Father is divinely protected from error.
John Paul II opposed capital punishment. But he did not make an infallible statement and did not propose this conviction in union with all bishops in all churches in the world. That was his personal conviction. The Holy Father’s interpretation is strictly doctrinal. Christ called His followers to “hear the Church” (Matthew 18:17)…and would not want us to hear error.
We only have a few dogmas…3 dogmas ? out of 2,000 years…correct me anyone…
When someone goes to Mass a number of times, eventually one will be able to separate the local church from the universal faith…and when one begins to recognize the Holy Spirit speaking and working within the universal and apostolic faith at Mass and reception of the sacraments, one will find one’s self at the center of God…balanced and connected to all of His creation, the path now laid out to follow…we are pilgrims in this world…going forward together to Christ and to our heavenly home.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
This came to mind after I went up to clean the kitchen…
So many years back during the '70’s, there was a great momentum in the North American church for women to become ordained priests. They were telling priests that they felt the Holy Spirit calling them to be priests.
Whenever the Church, through the papacy makes a DEFINITIVE statement, they are speaking infallibly…that it is, no more arguments and debating and fighting.
Finally, to make matters more confusing here…it was not John Paul II but Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Faith who made the definitive statement through the Holy Father John Paul that women could not be priests. My first class was with a feminist sister. When the news came out at finals times, she was so upset she cussed. She said ‘“They” did it!’ ‘That is it.’ ‘Forget it.’ ‘I am going to switch to the Episcopalian Church.’
It took the Church 2,000 years to make a definitive and infallible statement that women can not be ordained priests.
So many years back during the '70’s, there was a great momentum in the North American church for women to become ordained priests. They were telling priests that they felt the Holy Spirit calling them to be priests.
Whenever the Church, through the papacy makes a DEFINITIVE statement, they are speaking infallibly…that it is, no more arguments and debating and fighting.
Finally, to make matters more confusing here…it was not John Paul II but Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Faith who made the definitive statement through the Holy Father John Paul that women could not be priests. My first class was with a feminist sister. When the news came out at finals times, she was so upset she cussed. She said ‘“They” did it!’ ‘That is it.’ ‘Forget it.’ ‘I am going to switch to the Episcopalian Church.’
It took the Church 2,000 years to make a definitive and infallible statement that women can not be ordained priests.
Here’s the correction, Anne.
Luther’s concern about those books was the same concern of many throughout Church history, hence the name Antilegomena, or “spoken against”.
The dispute or concern about them is primarily authorship.
Late into his life, Luther often preached from particularly Jude and James. And, most importantly, they are considered canon universally, including Lutheranism.
Jon
S
Soldier_X
Guest
Yes and no.
E
Eutychus123
Guest
Spoken like a true AnglicanYes and no.
- Status