Catholic Church founded by Jesus?

[julietteamdg]

Our Lord also said however that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church. Once you see that the Catholic Church IS His Church, then you will understand that we must weather the storm and be with the Church everything.

Also, there is no other Church that is like the Catholic Church, no other one has the fullness of the faith, so to your rose comment I say there is no other rose.

God bless,

 

[MarkRome]

In my Protestant upbringing, I have been taught that many of the doctrines of the Catholic Church are idolatrous. When I try to defend some of the Catholic doctrines to my Protestant friends, they appear to consider me like I’m a heretic.

I appreciate your fears. I too was in that camp for a long time. I am a Catholic convert. It’s not easy to do if one was constantly told that the Pope is the antichrist and you have to go against everything you were taught about the Catholic Church.

In the end, I had to follow truth, no matter where that led me and no matter what the cost. One issue that all of your Protestant friends have is that of authority. Whose authority do you trust to correctly interpret the Bible. In the end, Jesus never intended for us to be private interpreters of the Bible and did set up a Church to protect the truth. The doctrines Protestants hold are no older than 500 years.

Go back and read the Early Church Fathers. They were Catholic. I suggest getting The Faith of the Early Fathers compiled by William Jurgens. Some of these early Church Fathers were taught by the Apostles, ordained by the Apostles. My favorite is St Ignatius of Antioch around 100 AD. He was instructed by the Apostles John and was ordained by Peter as Bishop of Antioch. He wrote on his way to martyrdom, "Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. " He wasn’t coining a term “catholic church” here, he was using it in the proper noun sense. That is but one example.

 

[Wannano]

For me it was the bible that really did it. Learning how to really read the bible, to know who the writer was, who the writer’s audience was, what was the culture. Most of all that to know the message, you need to read the passage, not a couple of verses.

I have felt for some time now that I should refrain from posting. However, I am responding to your very interesting comment.

What you have stated here about reading the Bible is exactly what I have heard for the last 60 years in my non-Catholic church. Over and over this has been expounded from the pulpit.

 

[mcq72]

For Protestants, however, the pastor cannot be marked by Divine Authority. It’s normally by scholarship. The pastor graduated from a seminary, and the belief is that the Holy Spirit guided the seminary program, so the pastor is “annointed

Perhaps, but so it is with the CC and it’s " pastors…very institutionalized. Yet it is not for all, for there are some truly annointed and gifted .

 

[Horton]

What you have stated here about reading the Bible is exactly what I have heard for the last 60 years in my non-Catholic church. Over and over this has been expounded from the pulpit.

What you are most likely hearing are only justifications for leaving the Catholic Church. The bible was complied by the Catholic Church, it wouldn’t have teachings against the Catholic Church. Many people try to interpret pieces & parts, twisting it to say what they want it say.

 

[Glenn]

The Born Again Christian has sincerity and willingness and openness. I have seen it many times. They will not just openly tell a lie to themselves or others. But the simple fact is that the process of “discerning the Spirit” is in no way as simple or clear as the Born Again idea would give us. The possibility of an individual, even very sincere, searching the Scriptures for being deceived is very high.

Problem is that we often misinterpret those things… it is actually so easy to do this. So many heresies through history are because of misinterpretation.

My understanding of the position of the Catholic Church is that Protestants are “separated brethren.” Peter Kreeft, in his book on the Catechism, says that “members of Protestant churches, ‘separated brethren,’ are parts of Christ’s Mystical Body if they are Christians, though they are separated from his visible Body on earth in various degrees.” “The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but who do not however profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.” (LG 15).

So, I assume from this the Church believes that Protestants, though outside of the Roman Catholic Church, do have the Holy Spirit, since the apostle Paul said,

“You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” (Romans 8:9).

Then the apostle John said,

“Therefore I inform you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit” (1 John 1:2).

So I assume that Protestants can know the truth that is necessary for their salvation. They believe in the Apostles and Nicene creeds, and express certainty in the fundamental doctrines of a Creator, of his triune nature, of the dual nature of Christ (fully God and fully man), his virgin birth, his bodily resurrection and ascension, his inspired and infallible Word, etc.

So I would think that as Christians, we can all believe that the Spirit has led Protestants into Truth. Maybe it is not all of the Truth, but without the Spirit, no one can accept any of these truths. A Muslim might accept the idea of one God, but Allah is not the God of Scripture or the God who Moses understood as I AM or who Jesus called his Father.

So at least to some degree, Protestants do know the Truth without distortion. If all they knew about God and salvation was somehow distorted, they would not be “separated brethren,” because they would not be saved. Would you agree with this?

 

[Glenn]

continued…

To the question of where that truth is perfectly preserved, the source of that truth, other than Jesus Christ himself: Protestants say the Word of God (interpreted to the believer by the Holy Spirit, who is the author of that Word) and Catholics say the People of God, the Body of Christ (with Jesus Christ as the Living Head). At least that might be one way of looking at the distinction.

So again, we might say that Protestants can have have the truth necessary for salvation, but the source of that truth is the Catholic Church. Protestants will, of course, contend that the Catholic Church is subject to error, just like all other Christian churches. And I know plenty of practicing “cafeteria” Catholics who say the same thing (which in my mind, means that they are not really Catholic, because that is not the Church teaches).

But I think I can safely say that all Christian denominations are indebted to the Catholic Church for the essential doctrines of Christ, without which, no one would be saved. (Of course, most Protestants would say that the word catholic simply means universal, and we are back to the mystical unity of the Church).

But I guess the bottom line is that I believe I do have the Holy Spirit. If I am being led into the Catholic Church, it would have to be the Spirit who does that. Many Catholic doctrines which were at one time very obscure to me (because of what I was taught in Protestant churches) are gradually becoming clearer to me–to the point where I will often defend the Catholic perspective over the Protestant perspective. So I don’t really think that because I am not currently in the Catholic Church, that somehow my growth in Christ, my gradual growth in the knowledge of the Truth, is always tainted. We all start from different points, and our sanctification is a gradual process that will not be complete until heaven. If we look at things from a personal rather than institutional perspective, we are all on the same journey, some of us are further along than others.

If the Holy Spirit has guided the Catholic Church in the same way and to the same degree as he has guided the inspiration of Scripture (i.e., in its infallibility), which I think is a reasonable conclusion, then there is still the operation of the Holy Spirit, which is not limited to either the Book or the People to bring men to a saving faith in Christ, which is the most fundamental and most important question of life.

In general, it seems that men can be guided into all Truth (eventually, not all at once) by the Holy Spirit, even though they are not in the Catholic Church.

 

[HolyCrusader007]

Very good to hear. So how could we Catholics explain to non-Catholics this issue in basic terms using your above sources?

In other words what year did didache come about and did this document use the word Catholic? Did the document say Jesus founded the Catholic Church.

Peter is said to have been the first Catholic pope right? In relation to that when did Jesus use the word Catholic? Is the word Catholic found in the New Testament?

I have always been of the view that Jesus was a Catholic that he founded the Catholic Church and that Peter was the first pope. I was not aware of the didache though and I would like to know more about it and how it relates to the word Catholic.

 

[Glenn]

Glenn:

The sources are not the evidence

Did you bother READING them? If not, don’t tell me such nonsense.

I really did not mean to offend you by this statement. I guess it came across as quite abrupt. I should have phrased my response differently. I understand that the sources provide us with the evidence for the facts. I was just asking if you knew what these source actually said that convinced you that the Catholic Church was the one true Church founded by Jesus.

Please forgive me for my abrupt language.

 

[Glenn]

I appreciate your fears. I too was in that camp for a long time. I am a Catholic convert. It’s not easy to do if one was constantly told that the Pope is the antichrist and you have to go against everything you were taught about the Catholic Church.

In the end, I had to follow truth, no matter where that led me and no matter what the cost.

Yes, I think you are right. In some Protestant circles, accepting Catholicism is like accepting the mark of the beast. What is ironic is that many of the Protestants I know who are most vehemently opposed to the Catholic Church are former Catholics. Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide are like a mantra to them.

I understand more of the Catholic perspective now with regard to faith and works, and the honor bestowed upon saints, which at one point appeared to me to be taking away from the glory of Christ. I still have this deep-seated conviction that as a sinner, all I can do is lift my empty hands of faith to Jesus, that ultimately, all honor belongs to Christ. But Scripture also teaches that we will share in his glory, that we will rule and reign as joint heirs of Christ. So any glory that we receive is ultimately to the glory of Christ.

 

[fredystairs]

Bill_B_NY:

The Born Again Christian has sincerity and willingness and openness. I have seen it many times. They will not just openly tell a lie to themselves or others. But the simple fact is that the process of “discerning the Spirit” is in no way as simple or clear as the Born Again idea would give us. The possibility of an individual, even very sincere, searching the Scriptures for being deceived is very high.

Problem is that we often misinterpret those things… it is actually so easy to do this. So many heresies through history are because of misinterpretation.

My understanding of the position of the Catholic Church is that Protestants are “separated brethren.” Peter Kreeft, in his book on the Catechism, says that “members of Protestant churches, ‘separated brethren,’ are parts of Christ’s Mystical Body if they are Christians, though they are separated from his visible Body on earth in various degrees.” “The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but who do not however profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.” (LG 15).

So, I assume from this the Church believes that Protestants, though outside of the Roman Catholic Church, do have the Holy Spirit, since the apostle Paul said,

So I assume that Protestants can know the truth that is necessary for their salvation. They believe in the Apostles and Nicene creeds, and express certainty in the fundamental doctrines of a Creator, of his triune nature, of the dual nature of Christ (fully God and fully man), his virgin birth, his bodily resurrection and ascension, his inspired and infallible Word, etc.

The problem is , as I see it, is that not all Protestants believe what you have listed here. There is such a variety of beliefs, that one cannot say for certain what a Protestant believes.

For instance, I have read some Protestants do not believe that baptism is necessary for salvation; that the Eucharist is only a symbol; that the Trinity means that there are three gods. I’ve even had a Protestant tell me that he believed that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to be able to discern what the Bible says on their own (but see 2 Peter 3:16)

I believe that most Protestants are sincere in their beliefs and that they are our speared brethren; however, without an overarching authority (the Catholic Church) only confusion will reign.

Pax

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

What you have stated here about reading the Bible is exactly what I have heard for the last 60 years in my non-Catholic church. Over and over this has been expounded from the pulpit.

What you are most likely hearing are only justifications for leaving the Catholic Church. The bible was complied by the Catholic Church, it wouldn’t have teachings against the Catholic Church. Many people try to interpret pieces & parts, twisting it to say what they want it say.

Sorry, I must not have made myself clear. I was not raised in an anti-Catholic environment. I was taught to know who the author was, who the audience was, what the culture was, and that to know the message, you need to read the passage not just a couple verses.

 

[Horton]

I’m sorry, I misunderstood your post.

 

[mcq72]

Our Lord also said however that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church.

Did the gates of Hell prevail against the Jewish nation? Did not Jesus say, “Salvation is of the Jews”, despite saying what He did about hypocrisy and bad doctrine? Did not they fulfill bringing Light into the world? Will not the Bride of Christ be delivered also, being comprised of all sorts of Christians (Catholics, Orthodox, Protestant) ? The gates of Hell will not prevent this marriage. Being washed by the blood of the Lamb is not a sectarian event, just as being a Jew with a circumcised heart was not sectarian ( Phariseed, Saduccees, zealots, Essenes).

The plea of reformers such as Huss or Tyndale or Wycliffe, Luther and Calvin were not the gates of hell calling.

 

[julietteamdg]

The mystical body of Christ is His Church, His bride, which is very much not the protestants. The protestant “churches” were all foundes by men, who interpreted events their own way, interpreted the bible their own way, and has led to 40k+ protestant denominations.
Our Lord spoke of ONE, UNIFIED Church, not a million with their different doctrines and interpretations.
Truth matters, Our Lord is truth, and seeing Him the right way matters.
Lukewarmedness is smiling at protestants and letting them think its ok to be Christian any way they want, and that’s a surefire way to lead many to damnation.

Are there protestants in Heaven? Of course I believe so, as the Lord is eternally merciful, but we can’t just assume that all protestants will be saved.

Salvation is of the Jews = Our Lord was born of their flesh, salvation came from the Jewish lineage. Which is what was promised to them (I believe, I could be incorrect).
God bless,

 

[mcq72]

Also, there is no other Church that is like the Catholic Church, no other one has the fullness of the faith, so to your rose comment I say there is no other rose.

I appreciate your candor but again there is no second class Christian, and all smell sweet to the groom who have been washed by His blood and are now seated in heavenly places.

We are not bound to a name that developed, is temporary, for a time, as much as we are called to the unchanging One.

 

[julietteamdg]

Exactly, we are called to follow Our Lord through his One, Holy, and Apostolic Church, the Catholic Church.

You ignore all my statements about how skewed protestant doctrines are. You just say all who are washed in the Blood of the Lamb are saved, which is sorta true. All who are baptized are marked as God’s children, but of course we have free will and so can reject it.

And now I’m gonna stop answering to this because I don’t really like arguing with protestants on the internet. I’ve said my peace.
God bless you and may the Lord have mercy on you.

 

[mcq72]

Salvation is of the Jews = Our Lord was born of their flesh, salvation came from the Jewish lineage. Which is what was promised to them (I believe, I could be incorrect).

Yes, that is correct. Salvation is of Jews because of Christ, not highlighting sects of Pharisees, Sadducees …it is a Jewish thing.

Likewise salvation is Christ centered, a Christian thing ( not highlighting Baptist, Lutheran, Catholic sects).

 

[mcq72]

but we can’t just assume that all protestants will be saved.

Agree. Not a sect thing, but a Christ thing.

 

[julietteamdg]

. . . .

Anyone can be a Christian, thanks be to God, but there is very obviously a distinction between the different “churches” and the true Church. Of course, Our Lord unifies us all, but protestants have too much of a skewed theology.

If you really can’t see an issue with there being . . . many . . . protestant denominations and all have their own doctrines and interpretations idk what to tell you.

Pax