J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Not quite.
The Samaritans were only half Jewish and were not part if the 12 tribes. They found their own way to worship God.
- Status
The Samaritans were only half Jewish and were not part if the 12 tribes. They found their own way to worship God.
L
ltwin
Guest
No. They would have said they rejected the Pope’s jurisdiction, but they never said they “left” the Catholic Church. They were “reformers.”
On the subject of Calvin setting up an entire city to follow him, Calvin was part of the Magisterial Reformation, which worked on the principle that territorial authorities were responsible for implementing reform. It was the municipal council that decided to institute Reform in Geneva. There was already a trend of localities wanting to shake off the grip of Rome over ecclesiastical matters. Even the Peasant revolts demanded the right of villages to choose their own pastors and to end oppressive feudal obligations to monasteries and abbeys.
I understand that its messy. But Christians have never all been on the same boat. There have always been divisions and unless a miracle actually occurs, there will continue to be until the Lord returns.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Can you point me to any true New Testament divisions?
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
How did they stay within the Church?
L
ltwin
Guest
Well, if you read the letters in the New Testament it becomes clear there were factions among Christians. No sure if that points to complete “divisions.” When we look later on, we clearly see divisions. In fact, the more Christians tried to rigorously define what they believed the more divisions appeared.
How does one leave the church? The reformers repudiated the jurisdiction of Rome in religious matters, but they never repudiated their membership in the Catholic (i.e. universal) Church. They never saw Rome as synonymous with Catholic.
C
concretecamper
Guest
K
KathleenGee
Guest
I really love the incredible photo of the tree!
I also think an answer to this idea of reforming Christianity by rejecting its past, abuses and the good, is emotional.
I think also of the tree in Jeremiah, that was planted with deep roots next to the river.
We must go back in history to see how the earliest Christians worshipped, both Jewish – the Nazarenes and the Gentiles. The basic worship was Scripture and Eucharist using letters of the Apostles and their chosen followers. Bishops were appointed by the apostles and the faith handed down.
If we base our faith on text, and not the Word Made Flesh, we are arbitrating the Lord and His Body, and we are not following the apostles but our current walk in the Spirit.
Catholics and Protestants respond to the Holy Spirit pretty much the same in reading daily reflections of Scripture and response to our current situation. But there is the greater reality of the Eucharist, The Word Made Flesh, that brings us into divine life that is not of our making, but of That which we can only affirm with ‘Amen!’.
We begin to live in a new supernatural power that we know we do not own. His presence is living within us and when we leave Mass, our automatic response to having attended Mass is joy, balance, connectedness with the world around us, and zeal to serve the Lord in our neighbor.
If we divide the Body of Christ, the Trinitarian baptized Christians, we are likewise blocking the fullness of Christ with our own personal interpretations.
Only in communion in the Church can we truly receive the fullness of Jesus Christ.
Last night we turned on this Protestant evangelical program. I liked very much what the preacher was saying.
But he had no church, no history, no saints. All he could fall back on was the testimony of faith of the righteous in the Old Testament. This subsequently causes one to think that those who come to the new life in Jesus really don’t have any outstanding faith to witness to the Body of believers in all its 2,000 year old history of Christianity.
The Church is now the new book, the living sacrament so to speak that carries on the witness of faith in salvation history. Without the Church, and its exhortation by the Apostles ‘to write it down!’ – documentation – and every local diocese/church and parish has its own meticulous records of history, there is no authentic witness that endures to the world, except different takes on how to be reformed.
The Council of Trent was the reform of the Medieval Church.
I also think an answer to this idea of reforming Christianity by rejecting its past, abuses and the good, is emotional.
I think also of the tree in Jeremiah, that was planted with deep roots next to the river.
We must go back in history to see how the earliest Christians worshipped, both Jewish – the Nazarenes and the Gentiles. The basic worship was Scripture and Eucharist using letters of the Apostles and their chosen followers. Bishops were appointed by the apostles and the faith handed down.
If we base our faith on text, and not the Word Made Flesh, we are arbitrating the Lord and His Body, and we are not following the apostles but our current walk in the Spirit.
Catholics and Protestants respond to the Holy Spirit pretty much the same in reading daily reflections of Scripture and response to our current situation. But there is the greater reality of the Eucharist, The Word Made Flesh, that brings us into divine life that is not of our making, but of That which we can only affirm with ‘Amen!’.
We begin to live in a new supernatural power that we know we do not own. His presence is living within us and when we leave Mass, our automatic response to having attended Mass is joy, balance, connectedness with the world around us, and zeal to serve the Lord in our neighbor.
If we divide the Body of Christ, the Trinitarian baptized Christians, we are likewise blocking the fullness of Christ with our own personal interpretations.
Only in communion in the Church can we truly receive the fullness of Jesus Christ.
Last night we turned on this Protestant evangelical program. I liked very much what the preacher was saying.
But he had no church, no history, no saints. All he could fall back on was the testimony of faith of the righteous in the Old Testament. This subsequently causes one to think that those who come to the new life in Jesus really don’t have any outstanding faith to witness to the Body of believers in all its 2,000 year old history of Christianity.
The Church is now the new book, the living sacrament so to speak that carries on the witness of faith in salvation history. Without the Church, and its exhortation by the Apostles ‘to write it down!’ – documentation – and every local diocese/church and parish has its own meticulous records of history, there is no authentic witness that endures to the world, except different takes on how to be reformed.
The Council of Trent was the reform of the Medieval Church.
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
Did King David’s sins affect the truth in his Psalms?
The bad behavior and the corruption of some members of the Church does not affect the truth of God. It affects the Church in that it makes us bad stewards but it does not deny the fact that Christ found Her.
What is you source in that they never saw Rome as synonymous with Catholic? Please keep in mind that you used a plural, so I’d like to see 2 or more sources for your claim.
As for leaving the Church:
Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”
Even the Apostles had a bad fruit among them (Judas Iscariot). Did that in any way prevent the truth of the Gospel? A resounding no.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Luther and Calvin definitely left the Church.
Luther did want liturgical reforms that did not come about until Vatican II, so in some ways he did have a prophetic voice. But then on the other hand, there are claims that some changes to the Mass have been protestant and brought in the focus on man and not Christ.
If they did not leave the Church, we would all be at the same Banquet today.
Luther did want liturgical reforms that did not come about until Vatican II, so in some ways he did have a prophetic voice. But then on the other hand, there are claims that some changes to the Mass have been protestant and brought in the focus on man and not Christ.
If they did not leave the Church, we would all be at the same Banquet today.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
And in the New Testsment when there was a disagreement (not a division) what happened? They went to the Apostles for a definitive decision. Or Paul or Peter wrote correction letters to them.
In the 2nd century we start to see divisions, but see immediate denouncing and correction from the Bishops. Bishops such as Ignatius of Antioch who learned from Polycarp who learned from John.
They made it very clear that it was not ok to be divided and it was not ok to practice differently than the Apostles taught. Today you would say they were wrong, that divisions are ok, and that the Apostles taught Ignatius wrong. On what authority can you say such a thing?
“They [the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat It with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the Passion has been revealed to us, and the Resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.” -Ignatius of Antioch 107 AD Letter to the Smyreneans
Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter 6, 110 A.D.:
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God … They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again.** They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes**.
A
adf417
Guest
Exact same argumement JW’s use for Charles Taze Russell.
This is one of the reasons I have shown in the past the trajectory of protestant theology (if you can p(name removed by moderator)oint one) set forth eventually leads to JW theology.Peace!!!
- Status