Can anyone start a church, and call it the church founded by Jesus Christ?

[Mikeoffaith]

First of all - the Catholic Church isn’t a “branch” of christ’s church - it IS Christ’s Church. He only established ONE Church and prayed fervently that it remain ONE as he and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23).
I think it is very difficult for many Protestants to get their heads around the this fact.

Secondly - “denominations” are schisms from Christ’s Church - or *schisms of schisms of schisms . . .
*If you belong to a denomination you are outside Christ’s Church - outside the Body of Christ - even though you are related to it. This includes every Christian sect that claims to be “non-denominational”.

The Catholic Church, being the only Church established by Christ cannot be a mere denomination because it is the monolith from which all of the others are divorced.

Hope that helps.

Yes Christ established one church which the Roman Catholic Church in it’s arrogance tore to pieces. I believe that there was one true church established and that the Orthodox have preserved that church in light of Apostolic Tradition. It is Rome that has wrenched itself away from all others. There was a bishop in Antioch before there was one in Rome.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Hey Mike and Schaick…

You said:

Absolutely. I think perhaps you were merely being facetious.

There were bad people in the CC in every century, starting with Judas; this proves nothing.

Instead of answering my question you come back with the following:

Jesus said in Matthew 16: I will build my churches - right or wrong???

You said: I don’t want to belong to a “branch” of Jesus’ church; I want to belong to the historical church founded by Jesus.

One more time if you don’t mind: You believe that Leo IX, in the 11th century, broke away from the one True Church founded by Jesus? Okay…Help me find that one true church, (as opposed to the protestant and catholic branches) - that existed in the first century and continues to exist today? In other words, when I walk out my door and drive by the CC to which I belong, where should I go to find the one true church founded by Jesus?

How many times to do I have to keep answering this question? Orthodox! Orthodox! Orthodox! Don’t get upset because you belong to a schismatic church. Just accept the fact that the Orthodox are the only ones that have remained faithful in the apostolic tradition and that Rome left the world of reality even before Leo IX. He and his minions just made it official.

 

[Nicea325]

I repeat:

I think it is hard for Catholics to get their heads around the fact that the Church Jesus built does not need to be contained in one Church denomination/body.

 

[Nicea325]

Yes Christ established one church which the Roman Catholic Church in it’s arrogance tore to pieces. I believe that there was one true church established and that the Orthodox have preserved that church in light of Apostolic Tradition. It is Rome that has wrenched itself away from all others. There was a bishop in Antioch before there was one in Rome.

I beg your pardon? And the Protestant Revolt UNITED Christianity? Take a looksy at history and tell me if HUMAN arrogance and spiritual pride of those man-made churches has made it better? Sorry,but the Reformation is the one that tore itself apart from Apostolic Tradition with the advent of so many man-made beliefs: sola scriptura,once saved always saved,adult only baptisms,women ordinations,gay-lesbians clergy,etc,etc.

 

[elvisman]

Yes Christ established one church which the Roman Catholic Church in it’s arrogance tore to pieces. I believe that there was one true church established and that the Orthodox have preserved that church in light of Apostolic Tradition. It is Rome that has wrenched itself away from all others. There was a bishop in Antioch before there was one in Rome.

Yes - and his name was PETER.
But, the Church was not called the Orthodox Church in the first century.

In fact, Peter’s successor, Ignatius of Antioch called it the Catholic Church:
**“Where the bishop is to be seen, there let all his people be; just as, wherever Jesus Christ is present, there is the Catholic Church” **
***(**Ignatius of Antioch, *Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).

Funny, how he didn’t refer to it as the Orthodox Church, isn’t it?

By the way - it is Protestantism is all its forms that has splintered the Body of Christ to the tune of 30,000 or so divorced factions.
HARDLY the unity that christ prayed for in John 17, is it?

 

[Nicea325]

Yes - and his name was PETER.
But, the Church was not called the Orthodox Church in the first century.

In fact, Peter’s successor, Ignatius of Antioch called it the Catholic Church:
"Where the bishop is to be seen, there let all his people be; just as, wherever Jesus Christ is present, there is the Catholic Church"
***(**Ignatius of Antioch, *****Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).

Funny, how he didn’t refer to it as the Orthodox Church, isn’t it?

By the way - it is Protestantism is all its forms that has splintered the Body of Christ to the tune of 30,000 or so divorced factions.
HARDLY the unity that christ prayed for in John 17, is it?

elvisman,

For some strange reason many non-Catholics like to use the term ‘unity’ and the ‘Body of Christ’ very loosely. Ya think?

 

[elvisman]

elvisman,

For some strange reason many non-Catholics like to use the term ‘unity’ and the ‘Body of Christ’ very loosely. Ya think?

Yup.
You cannot have the Body of Christ unless you have unity (John 17:21-23).
Thousands of “bodies” doesn’t equal His ONE Body.

 

[Nicea325]

Yup.
You cannot have the Body of Christ unless you have unity (John 17:21-23).
Thousands of “bodies” doesn’t equal His ONE Body.

I agree 100%. Now get those who believe in thousands of different denominations as ‘One Body’ to understand?

 

[rainman10]

How many times to do I have to keep answering this question? Orthodox! Orthodox! Orthodox! Don’t get upset because you belong to a schismatic church. Just accept the fact that the Orthodox are the only ones that have remained faithful in the apostolic tradition and that Rome left the world of reality even before Leo IX. He and his minions just made it official.

Mikeoffaith or Schiack. Please show me where in the Bible it is stated that if you don’t agree with the teachings of Jesus Christ’s church, you should go ahead and start your own. Since Jesus Christ did not know how to do it right, some man, any man, can start his own church and do it better than Jesus did.

 

[elvisman]

How many times to do I have to keep answering this question? Orthodox! Orthodox! Orthodox! Don’t get upset because you belong to a schismatic church. Just accept the fact that the Orthodox are the only ones that have remained faithful in the apostolic tradition and that Rome left the world of reality even before Leo IX. He and his minions just made it official.

Mike - if you truly believe that the Orthodoc Church is the only Church that has remained faithful - why are you a Lutheran?

 

[Bill_Pick]

A genuine question for my non-Catholic friends, with absolutely zero flippancy intended: Can anyone (like myself for example) - start a church, just as so many have done for the last 500 years, and call his or her new church the church founded by Jesus Christ?

The Bible said that Jesus Christ started a Church and that is ONE All the other started well after the !700,I may have the date, wrong it may have been after r 1600 Ad,
I can give you a list of dates that all church was started.

 

[Good_Fella]

Her missionary activity doesn’t necessarily make her a member of the visible one universal Church,

Correct but the fact that she taught Scripture, the Gospel sraight from the Bible no doctrine does.

The following addresses exactly what happened then happens today:

1 Corinthians 3
4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings?
5 What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task.

I fail to see how this passage relates to our discussion.

The apostle Paul is admonishing the Christian community in Corinth for evaluating and comparing their church leaders on the basis of their intellectual prowess rather than their spiritual gifts in the apostolate and placing a premium on the former. What truly characterizes a good church leader, according to Paul, is his cooperation with the gifts of grace he has received in the service of God, not his intellectual abilities. Without these special gifts for the apostolate, he could not serve the Church in the apostolic ministry. All the church leaders are servants of Christ and so are ultimately accountable to him in their stewardship of God’s grace. What is less important is how clever and well-spoken they are and how they are judged by the faithful on the criteria of their intellectual gifts and oral skills. Each community in Corinth benefits equally as long as their leaders are pious and labor faithfully in their religious calling. Each community alike partake of the fruits produced by their leaders who live up to the task they have been appointed to in their ministry for the sake of the one universal Church in general in a unity of faith. Rivalry and faction among the faithful are pointless.

11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ

Our Lord is the foundation, and thus are the doctrines and the one true faith of his Church which he established on Peter and the Apostles (Rev 21:14). In the words of our Lord: “He who hears you hears me.” The Church leaders would be attempting to lay an alien foundation if they presumed to convert the masses and shepherd the faithful by relying simply on human eloquence when preaching the gospel while being deficient in charity and a spirit of self-sacrifice.
…

21 So then, no more boasting about human leaders! All things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, 23 and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.

Agreed. But your missionary cousin isn’t a bishop or priest who has been called and appointed to a divine office that can be directly traced back to the Apostles. Paul doesn’t have people like her specifically in mind.

1 Corinthians 4
6 Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other. 7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?

Like the clergy, we have no cause to boast about any of the spiritual gifts we have received from God by his grace or take pride in our lay apostolates as members of the common priesthood of believers.

“I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.”
John 15, 5

"And thus preaching through the countries and cities they [the Apostles] appointed the firstfruits of their labours, having first proved them by the Spirit to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe…Our Apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason…they appointed those ministers already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry…For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties."
St.Clement, Bishop of Rome, Epistle to Corinthians, 42, 44 (A.D. 98)

PAX :heaven:

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by Mikeoffaith
How many times to do I have to keep answering this question? Orthodox! Orthodox! Orthodox! Don’t get upset because you belong to a schismatic church. Just accept the fact that the Orthodox are the only ones that have remained faithful in the apostolic tradition and that Rome left the world of reality even before Leo IX. He and his minions just made it official.

Upset? Listen to your tone? The accept the fact? Once you show me the overwhelming historical sources confirming the church Christ founded is and was called Orthodox? If you believe the RCC is a schismatic church,then I guess that goes against whatyou are ranting and raving about because last time I checked history Lutherans popped-up well over 1500 years later. So what does that make the Lutheran church?

BTW: Why aren’t you Orthodox since you accept the FACT they are the only ones that have remained faithful?

Please explain your mind-boggling contradictions?

 

[joe370]

The Bible said that Jesus Christ started a Church and that is ONE All the other started well after the !700,I may have the date, wrong it may have been after r 1600 Ad,
I can give you a list of dates that all church was started.

I agree with you and the only church on that list, founded by Jesus circa AD 33 is the Catholic church.

 

[Good_Fella]

Upset? Listen to your tone? The accept the fact? Once you show me the overwhelming historical sources confirming the church Christ founded is and was called Orthodox? If you believe the RCC is a schismatic church,then I guess that goes against whatyou are ranting and raving about because last time I checked history Lutherans popped-up well over 1500 years later. So what does that make the Lutheran church?

BTW: Why aren’t you Orthodox since you accept the FACT they are the only ones that have remained faithful?

Please explain your mind-boggling contradictions?

Ehh? :ehh:

 

[schaick]

It’s all spelled out in the Catechism. No guess work.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm do you have a question?

You don’t identify who you are.

I would think all the branches of Jesus’ Church would claim the Nicene Creed as their statement of faith.

 

[steve_b]

I would think all the branches of Jesus’ Church would claim the Nicene Creed as their statement of faith.

1. 
   *]There is no branch theory to the Church.
   *]We know WHO the Catholic Church is.
   *]E Orthodox aren’t Catholic, Protestants regardless if stripe, aren’t Catholic, …
   *]Therefore, how could one who is NOT Catholic state as an article of faith, they believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church if they were not in, or in union with, the Catholic Church?

 

[schaick]

Ummm, as I already showed you in post #68 - Luther’s authority was LUTHER himself.

**His own **words do not lie . . .

Oh, Shaick -
The Church NEVER condoned the selling of indulgences - neither did ANY Pope in history.
You are perpetuating an anti-Catholic lie.

This only BOLSTERS the Catholic position.

Whatever the Church ordains on earth has been ordained in heaven.
Jesus guaranteed this at the last supper in John 16:12-15 when he told tha Apostles that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church to ALL truth.

Something obviously wrong happened for the Council of Trent abolish indulgences.

A. E. McKilliam. U]A Chronicle of the Popes from St. Peter to Pius X]. (London., G. Bell and Sons, LTD, 1912.),
The issue by Leo X of a bull, granting Indulgences to all who should contribute to the building of the new church of St. Peter, begun under Julius II (q.v.), served to bring matters to a crisis.

Leo also said this:
Let all this holy Church of God, I say, arise, and with the blessed apostles intercede with almighty God to purge the errors of His sheep, to banish all heresies from the lands of the faithful, and be pleased to maintain the peace and unity of His holy Church.
…
*In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows:
…
That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.
…
We have therefore held a careful inquiry, scrutiny, discussion, strict examination, and mature deliberation with each of the brothers, the eminent cardinals of the holy Roman Church, as well as the priors and ministers general of the religious orders, besides many other professors and masters skilled in sacred theology and in civil and canon law. We have found that these errors or theses are not Catholic, as mentioned above, and are not to be taught, as such; but rather are against the doctrine and tradition of the Catholic Church, and against the true interpretation of the sacred Scriptures received from the Church.
…
our own authority, we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely each of these theses or errors as either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth.
*

Yes **if the Church had used the binding and loosing **correctly.

Actually Luther said on the matter:
*The word of Christ to Peter: “Whatsoever you shall loose on earth,” etc., is extended merely to those things bound by Peter himself. *

 

[Nicea325]

I would think all the branches of Jesus’ Church would claim the Nicene Creed as their statement of faith.

Branches? What you really meant to say is the thosands of DIFFERENT branches all doing their own thing. BTW: Not all churches profess the Nicene Creed,hence so much for your theory of ‘all the branches’ of Jesus Church.

 

[elvisman]

Something obviously wrong happened for the Council of Trent abolish indulgences.

A. E. McKilliam. U]A Chronicle of the Popes from St. Peter to Pius X]. (London., G. Bell and Sons, LTD, 1912.),
The issue by Leo X of a bull, granting Indulgences to all who should contribute to the building of the new church of St. Peter, begun under Julius II (q.v.), served to bring matters to a crisis.

Leo also said this:
Let all this holy Church of God, I say, arise, and with the blessed apostles intercede with almighty God to purge the errors of His sheep, to banish all heresies from the lands of the faithful, and be pleased to maintain the peace and unity of His holy Church.
…
*In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows: *
…
*That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit. *
…
We have therefore held a careful inquiry, scrutiny, discussion, strict examination, and mature deliberation with each of the brothers, the eminent cardinals of the holy Roman Church, as well as the priors and ministers general of the religious orders, besides many other professors and masters skilled in sacred theology and in civil and canon law. We have found that these errors or theses are not Catholic, as mentioned above, and are not to be taught, as such; but rather are against the doctrine and tradition of the Catholic Church, and against the true interpretation of the sacred Scriptures received from the Church.
…
our own authority, we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely each of these theses or errors as either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth.

Yes **if the Church had used the binding and loosing **correctly.

Actually Luther said on the matter:
*The word of Christ to Peter: “Whatsoever you shall loose on earth,” etc., is extended merely to those things bound by Peter himself. *

Get your story straight, Schaick. The Church never allowed the sale of indulgences. That was carried out by individuals who were acting on their own with no mandate from the Church

In fact, the Council of Trent issued some severe reforms regarding the practice of granting indulgences. Because of previous abuses by some individuals, “in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions” (Catholic Encyclopedia). This illustrated the Church’s
seriousness about stopping abuses from indulgences.