Catholic Church founded by Jesus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Glenn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Glenn

Guest
How do we know that the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus?
 
Historical evidence from 1st and 2nd century sources like the Didache, Clement of Rome, and Ignatius of Antioch
 
Those are the historical sources. What is the actual evidence?
 
How are historical sources not actual evidence ? We know of, say, Socrates, through historical sources. That sure doesn’t mean he didn’t exist.
 
The sources are not the evidence. I’'m not disputing the fact that these sources existed, or that they might have said something or did something that affirmed the claim that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. But what was it that they said or did that makes one come to this conclusion?
 
What other sources other than historical ones do you want? Without history you don’t even know what books are and aren’t Bible 🙂
Glenn said:
But what was it that they said or did that makes one come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...
They were disciples of Apostles who knew them personally and they professed faith in Catholic Church. That’s it mostly.
 
I’m not asking for sources other than historical ones. Historical sources are what we need. Granted, they were disciples of the Apostles. But I’m not asking what you “believe” they professed. I want to know what they themselves professed. If they are the historical sources, then we need to know what they said.
 
Glenn said:
The sources are not the evidence. I’'m not disputing the fact that these sources existed, or that they might have said something or did something that affirmed the claim that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. But what was it that they said or did that makes one come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...
You do realize what you’re saying right?

For historical things, historical sources are our primary non-faith evidence.

From a faith perspective (or even a reason perspective), the continuity of the Church, the continuity of its teachings in spite of bad actors, the fact that we can read the testimony of the Early Church Fathers and see in it the same mass we celebrate today. The miracles throughout history, the Eucharistic Miracles, the apparitions of Our Lady, the consistent testimony of the Saints.

Most of All, because Jesus said “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.” The Catholic Church is the only church that can trace its lineage all the way back to Christ’s declaration to Peter on that day. He gave Peter the Keys to the kingdom (a clear reference to the stewards of the Davidic kingdom that were left in charge while the king was away.)
Glenn said:
I want to know what they themselves professed. If they are the historical sources, then we need to know what they said.
Click to expand...
OHHHHH

You want their actual writings. If that’s the case, a great book is The Fathers Know Best. It categorizes the ECF’s writings on a vast array of topics.
 
Last edited:
Correct. I want to know what the historical documents say. I don’t really separate faith and reason. As you indicated, the continuity of the Church, what Jesus said to Peter in regard to the keys to the kingdom, the apparitions of Mary, etc. are all matters of faith, but they are also verifiable history. Christianity is rooted in history.

But it still seems as if some are confusing the historical sources with the actual history. We go to the sources to find the history.
 
You seem to have some idea that the “historical sources” are something different from the history, and the evidence of history, etc.

Are you assuming that the source material is somehow corrupt and doesn’t reflect what was really going on?
 
Tis_Bearself said:
You seem to have some idea that the “historical sources” are something different from the history, and the evidence of history, etc.

Are you assuming that the source material is somehow corrupt and doesn’t reflect what was really going on?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure why this is so confusing. The historical sources are not the evidence. They are men who give us the evidence. Unless I know what they actually said, the fact that they existed is worthless.
 
tafan2 said:
Well, I would suggest starting with the ever popular wikipedea, it gives a reasonable summary of the documents referenced above:
Click to expand...
Thank you for at least some references. I can do the research myself, but I was hoping someone on this forum would have some of the statements from these writings where they actually affirmed the claim in question.
 
I don’t even know what that is. And if you cannot answer an honest question without prejudging motives, then I would prefer not to hear anything further from you.
 
Individual statements, even though not used out of context, but without context, rarely satisfy anyone who is not already on board. This is true of scripture and its true of early church writings. So I could go and find a few statements out of those documents, but I doubt you would be convinced (assuming you are not convinced right now), and I think you know that to be the case. If one wants to read the Church Father’s, one will get a real sense that the early Church was most certainly Catholic. Even without doing that, most of us know a few things about the early Church:
  • it organized with a hierachy, the Bishop being the head of the Church in a given city and its surrounding area. There were deacons and priests.
  • it places a high focus on the Eucharistic celebration
  • Baptism was very important for initiation into the Church
These are traits of all of the ancient Churches: the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, the Catholic Church, the Coptics. They are not traits held by many (I would say most) Protestant Churches. It is clear the early church was Catholic. It would be a big stretch to say it had major similiarities with most of protestantism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top