Christian Unity

  • Thread starter Thread starter ferdie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, I don’t get it, bingo what?:o
The game B-I-N-G-O.😃

If you really want to know, the reason that I joined the RCC was for several reasons. I will list them here, but they are not necessarily in order of importance.
  1. I wanted my family to go to the same Church to worship God together. My wife was more comfortable at the RCC, so because I love her deeply, I joined the RCC.
  2. When my daughter was two years old we enrolled her in a Presbyterian pre-school, because I wanted her to be exposed to Christian teachings, even outside of our home, especially when she was so young, so that she would have Christ as her foundation. My wife was able to go to work there also so it was a tremendous blessing all around. After kindergarten we put our daughter in the local Catholic school to keep her in a Christian atmosphere. My daughter started going to the public school, that is just down the road, beginning in the third grade.
3.The RCC offers a rich Christian history and a little different perspective on our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ than one can get from most other sources, so I guess you could say curiousity also had something to do with my decision.
  1. Through my life, at least since I was very young, I have been a Christian. I’ve studied Christainity and the Bible from a lot of different viewpoints. I was hoping that there might be a better chance to discuss, research, and study the Bible in the RCC than in some of the other settings that I have been. I noticed while studying with various christian groups that there seemed to be an underlying ill will towards anyone who questioned any of their particular doctrines. I thought that there would be less pride, arrogance, and hate mongering at the RCC than there was elsewhere. Unfortunately that’s not what I have found so far, but maybe I’m looking for some place that doesn’t exsist. Nonetheless, I have made some good friends through the years and I have met a lot of interesting people.
  2. I had a personal revelation, but I can’t discuss that here. I believe that this is where God wants me right now, and because I believe that, I will remain here until God leads me somewhere else.
Thank you for your question. How about you? What made you join the RCC?
 
The game B-I-N-G-O.😃

If you really want to know, the reason that I joined the RCC was for several reasons. I will list them here, but they are not necessarily in order of importance.
  1. I wanted my family to go to the same Church to worship God together. My wife was more comfortable at the RCC, so because I love her deeply, I joined the RCC.
  2. When my daughter was two years old we enrolled her in a Presbyterian pre-school, because I wanted her to be exposed to Christian teachings, even outside of our home, especially when she was so young, so that she would have Christ as her foundation. My wife was able to go to work there also so it was a tremendous blessing all around. After kindergarten we put our daughter in the local Catholic school to keep her in a Christian atmosphere. My daughter started going to the public school, that is just down the road, beginning in the third grade.
3.The RCC offers a rich Christian history and a little different perspective on our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ than one can get from most other sources, so I guess you could say curiousity also had something to do with my decision.
  1. Through my life, at least since I was very young, I have been a Christian. I’ve studied Christainity and the Bible from a lot of different viewpoints. I was hoping that there might be a better chance to discuss, research, and study the Bible in the RCC than in some of the other settings that I have been. I noticed while studying with various christian groups that there seemed to be an underlying ill will towards anyone who questioned any of their particular doctrines. I thought that there would be less pride, arrogance, and hate mongering at the RCC than there was elsewhere. Unfortunately that’s not what I have found so far, but maybe I’m looking for some place that doesn’t exsist. Nonetheless, I have made some good friends through the years and I have met a lot of interesting people.
  2. I had a personal revelation, but I can’t discuss that here. I believe that this is where God wants me right now, and because I believe that, I will remain here until God leads me somewhere else.
Thank you for your question. How about you? What made you join the RCC?
Well I was born catholic but never receive catechism even from my parents. Born again fundamentalist and bibble baptist christians evangelized me and then I started to hate the catholic church. Then an Iglesia Ni Cristo evalgelized me and I was under INC indoctrination when my friends from these different dennominations started debating about who is the true church. One thing in common about these deonominations, they are alll anit-catholic. So I started investigating WHY they hate the Catholic Church. Four things that got stucked in my mind reading the bible and the christian history:
  1. Christ founded the church on a rock with the promise of the Holy Spirit to guide it until the end of the world
  2. ‘As the Father has sent me so I send you’
  3. …that they maybe one as we are one’
    4 … one sheperd one flock
It came down to AUTHORITY. I figure God will leave us something that CAN answer with AUTHORITY when there are problems.

Then alll my doubts just crumbled down. Now when non-catholic pose me a questions I can not answer, I don’t doubt anymore and get blown by every doctrines blown to me. I trust that the Church founded by Christ will make it clear for me.
 
Yes, the Apostles warned of people who would distort and promote false teachings, and I appreciate your warning… now, please go look in the mirror to see firsthand one of these who has promoted distortion and misleading statements. I recommend you please admonish them in no uncertain terms to bring them inline with the true teachings of the Church built by Christ, started at Pentecost, which is known today as the Catholic Church.

For example, please show us my quote where I stated that the “Body of Christ was known at Pentecost by the **term **Catholic.” You won’t, because I didn’t and you simply distorted what I said… once again.

Please honestly attempt to understand what was said… namely the Catholic Church traces it’s origin to Pentecost. There was no interim Church, only a Church without a descriptive name. As I’ve explicitly stated, the Church was not called Catholic at the time of Pentecost. However, the Church started at Pentecost is the Catholic Church.

Simply stated, it’s misleading for anyone to say that the “Christian Church” preceded the “Catholic Church.” It’s correct to say that the evidence shows that followers of Christ in the early Church called themselves Christian, likely before the Church built by Christ was given a more descriptive name. It’s also correct to say that the Catholic Church (which is most authentically and truly Christian) traces it’s beginning to Pentecost. Although, we do not know of a more descriptive name for the Church which started at Pentecost, until we see that by around 100 AD (and possibly earlier), that this Church built by Christ (which started at Pentecost) became known commonly as the Catholic Church.
Unbelievable! Now you resort to a tap dancing and trying to say that your original post says exactly what mine was saying all along. Now you’re saying that “Christian” wasn’t a descriptive enough name. Wow, if you would have been around back then you could have straightened things out! I guess they didn’t understand things as profoundly as you either. If you would have been around when Jesus was with His Apostle you could have told Jesus that He needed to refer to his followers as “Catholics”, they would never have been refered to as “Christians” at Antioch and at Pentecost, then there would be no need for this discussion, which really I don’t see any need for any further discussion. Your true colors have been apparent throughout. Your wisdom is certainly impressive.

I am ashamed. I have not acted like a Christian should and I have not been a good example. I ask God to be forgiven in the name of Jesus Christ. Jesus is Lord!

Galatians 5:25-26 states:
Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.
 
How can we achieve christian unity like that of the Father and the Son? Who or what do you think will be the unifying factor aside from our Lord Jesus Christ?
Tribulation and great suffering. Always brings unity. Stand by…
 
As long as their exists a seperation because of essential doctrine i.e. real presence, communion of saints, pergatory, baptism; true union can not be achieved. Heck not even other Protestant denominations can have union with one another because of their doctrinal differences. A Presbyterian and Baptist can’t have real union because their pictures of Jesus are so much different. One’s Jesus died and saved those whom he chose. The other Jesus died for all and leaves the response for salvation as everyone’s own individual choice.

We can work together becaue of our commonality in the belief of his death and resurrection, but true union can not be attained.

True union can not be really reached with the Orthodox Church because of the scismatic relationship that has existed since 1054. Even though both share the same 7 sacraments, the scism still exists.

thebereanlife.com
I tend to agree. Paul says that we see through a cloudy mirror right now, but when Christ come back we will see perfectly.
 
As long as their exists a seperation because of essential doctrine i.e. real presence, communion of saints, pergatory, baptism; true union can not be achieved. Heck not even other Protestant denominations can have union with one another because of their doctrinal differences. A Presbyterian and Baptist can’t have real union because their pictures of Jesus are so much different. One’s Jesus died and saved those whom he chose. The other Jesus died for all and leaves the response for salvation as everyone’s own individual choice.

We can work together becaue of our commonality in the belief of his death and resurrection, but true union can not be attained.

True union can not be really reached with the Orthodox Church because of the scismatic relationship that has existed since 1054. Even though both share the same 7 sacraments, the scism still exists.

thebereanlife.com
Your post touches on examples of disunity, and we need to address the deeper truth of whether these differences can be legitimately held, and where the problem really lies. These doctrinal differences are not acceptable. The idea of doctrinal differences between Christians is scandalous and intolerable! It is not the way Christ (Who is the Truth) established things, but is man made. The problem is man’s rejection of Christ in a lesser or greater manner. We must fully accept Him to have unity. While some reject Christ’s ways to a lesser or greater degree and prefer their own ways, there will be disunity. Where in God’s Word does it even describe the difference between essential and nonessential doctrine? It does not. It is only because of man’s rebellion, that the way Christ set things up has been rejected… like somehow there is essential and nonessential doctrine. Does Christ differ with the Father on Baptism, or the Eucharist? No, not one iota! Christ told us that we live on every word that comes from the mouth of God. That includes following the way He set things up, all of the deposit of faith, the Church He built, the Prime Minister He established, the Sacraments in His Church. Those who do violence to His Holy Word in distorting it, and reject the true meanings in favor of their own, create the disunity.

One of my greatest concerns is that we all be one, as Christ asked. When everyone does their own thing instead of following Christ, it tears us apart. We should be one, united in the Body of Christ. Christ gave us a means for that, and it is through the Church He built, namely the RCC, His Bride, His Body in which He is made really and truly present to us. I don’t see all of us really having the unity that Christ asked for, with people outside of communion with the RCC. It is only in the RCC that the true doctrine is known. It’s also not through false ecumenism that will get us to the type of unity required. The truth must prevail. The Truth is not something, but Someone who asked for this unity. In disunity, we are not doing what Christ asked. We must all be one, as Christ asked. The only Way, is the Truth.
 
Unbelievable! Now you resort to a tap dancing and trying to say that your original post says exactly what mine was saying all along. Now you’re saying that “Christian” wasn’t a descriptive enough name. Wow, if you would have been around back then you could have straightened things out! I guess they didn’t understand things as profoundly as you either. If you would have been around when Jesus was with His Apostle you could have told Jesus that He needed to refer to his followers as “Catholics”, they would never have been refered to as “Christians” at Antioch and at Pentecost, then there would be no need for this discussion, which really I don’t see any need for any further discussion. Your true colors have been apparent throughout. Your wisdom is certainly impressive.

I am ashamed. I have not acted like a Christian should and I have not been a good example. I ask God to be forgiven in the name of Jesus Christ. Jesus is Lord!

Galatians 5:25-26 states:
Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.
You seem to quote Scripture, which is a good start, but it’s also good to know what it really means, and the Catholic Church upholds and defends the inerrant word of the Scriptures. Actually, my posts are very believable… if people are willing and capable of understanding, but only if you are willing to go with the truth. Those who prefer their own way respond as you have.

I notice you didn’t provide any quote of mine to support what you had claimed that I stated that the “Body of Christ was known at Pentecost by the term Catholic.” You couldn’t, because you had presented a distortion of what I said in order to appear to have some decent argument with it. What you’ve done in falsely quoting is to bear false witness against someone. Maybe a little shame wouldn’t hurt you.

My posts have been consistent from the beginning. **None of my posts have adopted your misleading language nor have tried to falsely claim what you have. ** None conflicts with any of my other posts, but they repeat, reinforce, and attempt new ways to explain the same thing to you as we have gone along.

The question is about the entity of the Church, not what individuals call themselves. That people likely called themselves Christian before they called their Church Catholic, doesn’t mean that the “Christian Church” preceded the “Catholic Church.” It is the same entity. It has connotations in light of the original Church. The original Church at Pentecost was Catholic in nature, and not Protestant for example. It was not generically Christian, and then later tightened up to become Catholic. It was built from the start to be a universal Church, with Peter as head. Please go back and reread, if you’re willing to understand. I doubt that others are having a problem understanding what was written… I would think that the vast majority of those reading my posts could at least understand them, even if they may disagree. It’s becoming a bit entertaining that you really don’t get this. Forgive me for having laughed. I’ve explained it too much already. You still don’t get it, and I don’t know that you will. I don’t know that anything I tell you will help you get it… not because I haven’t provided it in a most understandable manner. I’ll simply pray for you.
 
The followers of Jesus Christ are considered the “Body of Christ” or “the Church”. At Antioch, the followers of Christ were first called “Christians”. Since the followers of Christ are considered to be “the Church”, and they were called “Christians”, then it’s obvious that the Church at Pentecost, at that time, was considered the “Christian Church”. It wasn’t until the second century A.D. that the “Christian Church” was refered to as the “Catholic Church”. From your first post you seem to have a problem with me refering to the group of followers at Antioch as the “Christian Church” like I was trying to insult the “Catholic Church”, which I wasn’t. It’s just Church history.

I sincerely apologize if I have offended you in anyway, and I forgive you for your insulting remarks. I ask God to bless you, sincerely.

Jesus is Lord!
 
The followers of Jesus Christ are considered the “Body of Christ” or “the Church”. At Antioch, the followers of Christ were first called “Christians”. Since the followers of Christ are considered to be “the Church”, and they were called “Christians”, then it’s obvious that the Church at Pentecost, at that time, was considered the “Christian Church”. It wasn’t until the second century A.D. that the “Christian Church” was refered to as the “Catholic Church”. From your first post you seem to have a problem with me refering to the group of followers at Antioch as the “Christian Church” like I was trying to insult the “Catholic Church”, which I wasn’t. It’s just Church history.

I sincerely apologize if I have offended you in anyway, and I forgive you for your insulting remarks. I ask God to bless you, sincerely.

Jesus is Lord!
My remarks were not meant to be insulting in any way, but meant charitably to try to wake you up from a Catechetical slumber. Understanding the Church and especially the Eucharist (the source and summit of our Christian life) is vitally important (to say something like the Christian Eucharist preceded the Catholic Eucharist would also be misleading). I think it’s starting to work, in that you have softened your language here in your use of the terms, even if more study and acceptance of truth is needed.

Neither the term Christian, nor the term Catholic were known to be in use at Pentecost, so at the time of Pentecost the Church would not have been known as the Christian Church. Today, we speak in these terms and know today that the Church built by Christ with the successor of Peter as head was the only Church started at Pentecost. Other Christian churches (Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, thousands of non-denoms were started later in time by men and women who were not God). The way you were using the terms Christian Church to precede the Catholic Church was misleading. You weren’t insulting the Catholic Church, but you weren’t presenting Church history correctly either. There is no form or nature of Christian Church with doctrine not currently upheld by the Catholic Church that preceded the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, we say that the Church started by Christ was and is Christian (even though at the time of Pentecost, we have no evidence of the word “Christian” even being in use). The Church started at Pentecost and built by Christ was from its beginning and still is Catholic in nature. However, to say that one preceded the other is simply misleading. One term for the members may have preceded in use the term for the Church. To give something a descriptive name doesn’t change it’s nature. Your use of the phrases certainly did not represent understanding of the nature of the true Church, and also can mislead others. It’s like saying the woman made from Adam’s rib preceded Eve.

It wouldn’t matter if the word Catholic started to be used in the year 1,000, as the Church started at Pentecost would still be the same Catholic Church. If we changed the name today to “Universal” then it would still be the same Church started at Pentecost. It would then be improper to say that the Catholic Church preceded the Universal Church, because it’s the same Church. We could say that the Church became known as the Universal Church in 2009. It would also then be proper to say that the Universal Church started a Pentecost. That being said, the term second century (as in sometime between years 100-199) is probably correct (as would for sure the term “first millennium”), but also doesn’t convey very much accuracy the time, which was at the very beginning of the second century at the latest (by 105), and there are some who believe the term Catholic was in use much before that time, possibly before the year 100.

BTW, I accept your apology… it’s obvious that your words were meant to be insulting, but I hadn’t allowed it to be hurtful and already forgiven you for that. It know it can be alarming when someone upsets the understanding that you have held. It’s for a very good reason, though. Christ is the Truth.
 
Within mainstream Christianity, isn’t Jesus the unifying factor? Isn’t the fact, that almost all believe he died so our sins could be forgiven a unifying event or thing? Isn’t the fact, that mainstream Christianity believes in the Resurrection a unifying concept?

While the many different Christian denominations have different methods of worship, they most all have the main tenets of Christianity in common.

IMO, this is a common problem within Christianity, we bicker among ourselves about the differences, but rarely focus on what we all have in common.
ferdie,

I’m quoting “mikew262”, because I think his post makes a great observation and a lot of sense. I’m guilty of un-Christian behavior towards someone that I don’t agree with by answering an insult with an insult, instead of doing what 1 Peter 3:8-9 says.

"8 Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. 9 Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing. "

I think that there are Christians out there that are a lot better examples than I have been, and I think that if they follow this simple teaching they will receive the promised blessing. If you were wanting to know one thing that could bring about true Christain unity, I think this would be one of them.
 
ferdie,

I’m quoting “mikew262”, because I think his post makes a great observation and a lot of sense. I’m guilty of un-Christian behavior towards someone that I don’t agree with by answering an insult with an insult, instead of doing what 1 Peter 3:8-9 says.

"8 Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. 9 Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing. "

I think that there are Christians out there that are a lot better examples than I have been, and I think that if they follow this simple teaching they will receive the promised blessing. If you were wanting to know one thing that could bring about true Christain unity, I think this would be one of them.
The problems that are arising in the world make people see the need for one voice, and **one sheperd, **and one flock.
 
The problems that are arising in the world make people see the need for one voice, and **one sheperd, **and one flock.
I agree with you! Jesus is Lord! Peace be with you and let’s pray together for unity!🙂
 
My remarks were not meant to be insulting in any way, but meant charitably to try to wake you up from a Catechetical slumber. Understanding the Church and especially the Eucharist (the source and summit of our Christian life) is vitally important (to say something like the Christian Eucharist preceded the Catholic Eucharist would also be misleading). I think it’s starting to work, in that you have softened your language here in your use of the terms, even if more study and acceptance of truth is needed.

Neither the term Christian, nor the term Catholic were known to be in use at Pentecost, so at the time of Pentecost the Church would not have been known as the Christian Church. Today, we speak in these terms and know today that the Church built by Christ with the successor of Peter as head was the only Church started at Pentecost. Other Christian churches (Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, thousands of non-denoms were started later in time by men and women who were not God). The way you were using the terms Christian Church to precede the Catholic Church was misleading. You weren’t insulting the Catholic Church, but you weren’t presenting Church history correctly either. There is no form or nature of Christian Church with doctrine not currently upheld by the Catholic Church that preceded the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, we say that the Church started by Christ was and is Christian (even though at the time of Pentecost, we have no evidence of the word “Christian” even being in use). The Church started at Pentecost and built by Christ was from its beginning and still is Catholic in nature. However, to say that one preceded the other is simply misleading. One term for the members may have preceded in use the term for the Church. To give something a descriptive name doesn’t change it’s nature. Your use of the phrases certainly did not represent understanding of the nature of the true Church, and also can mislead others. It’s like saying the woman made from Adam’s rib preceded Eve.

It wouldn’t matter if the word Catholic started to be used in the year 1,000, as the Church started at Pentecost would still be the same Catholic Church. If we changed the name today to “Universal” then it would still be the same Church started at Pentecost. It would then be improper to say that the Catholic Church preceded the Universal Church, because it’s the same Church. We could say that the Church became known as the Universal Church in 2009. It would also then be proper to say that the Universal Church started a Pentecost. That being said, the term second century (as in sometime between years 100-199) is probably correct (as would for sure the term “first millennium”), but also doesn’t convey very much accuracy the time, which was at the very beginning of the second century at the latest (by 105), and there are some who believe the term Catholic was in use much before that time, possibly before the year 100.

BTW, I accept your apology… it’s obvious that your words were meant to be insulting, but I hadn’t allowed it to be hurtful and already forgiven you for that. It know it can be alarming when someone upsets the understanding that you have held. It’s for a very good reason, though. Christ is the Truth.
I appreciate any counsel given in good faith, but your posts have come across as very insulting, as I’m sure they were meant to be. As far as being charitable, you may be giving it the ole college try, but you are falling short. No offense, but you have what I call “spiritual halitosis”. You may have a lot of truth to share with myself and others, but when you open your mouth, the listener (the reader of your posts), can only focus on the stench. Just a little brotherly advice, but maybe you should tame your tongue. The third chapter of James starts with the following:

3:1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2 For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. 3 If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well. 4 Look at the ships also: though they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. 5 So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things.

How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, [1] and set on fire by hell. [2] 7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. 10 From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, [3] these things ought not to be so. 11 Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? 12 Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water.

I will re-read and consider what you have posted, and I hope that you reflect on my advice. You seem to have a strong faith and you could probably do a lot to help other Christians. Peace be with you.
 
Within mainstream Christianity, isn’t Jesus the unifying factor? Isn’t the fact, that almost all believe he died so our sins could be forgiven a unifying event or thing? Isn’t the fact, that mainstream Christianity believes in the Resurrection a unifying concept?

While the many different Christian denominations have different methods of worship, they most all have the main tenets of Christianity in common.

IMO, this is a common problem within Christianity, we bicker among ourselves about the differences, but rarely focus on what we all have in common.
Well, what did Christ tell us He wanted? What kind of unity is it, a loose unity based on professing His Holy Name, and agreeing on some of the issues? Christ’s own words are recorded in John 17:21-23 - That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, as we also are one: I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me.

He said “that they may be one, as we also are one” - does Jesus differ with the Father on things such as doctrine or any of the Sacraments? No, not one iota. If we are to be one, as they are one, we must not differ either. Christ gave us a means for that, so that we know the correct doctrine, dogma, Sacraments including the incomparable Eucharist… in the pillar and bulwark of truth, the RCC which upholds and protects all His deposit of faith, and has never taught error in faith and morals. He also left a “Prime Minister” as visible head of the Church when He, the King went back to Heaven. Pretty good means for unity, are they not? Christ has told us what He wanted, and gave us a means to do it. That people reject this leaves us with disunity. Those who defend what Christ asked and the means to get us there do a service to the world.

Should we all just say your way is good enough, as long as you recognize Christ as the Messiah? Don’t even the evil spirits recognize that Christ is the Messiah. Are all these who profess Christ is Lord even going to Heaven? Jesus said the answer is unfortunately “no.” In Matthew 7:21 - Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. What is His will? Is it that we can legitimately choose to have different doctrine, reject some or all of His Sacraments?

False ecumenism will not lead to true unity in the Body of Christ. It simply leads to a false sense of peace, where there really is none. There is one Way, the Truth. We must live on every word that comes from the mouth of God. Telling others that as long as they say “Lord, Lord,” that we can somehow all be unified in Christ is simply not true. We cannot say “good enough” to those preferring their own doctrine, rejecting the Sacraments, instead of accepting God’s way, just to appear to “play nice.” This would be doing no service to them, nor will it really help to bring about unity in the Body of Christ. There is one Way, the Truth.
 
I appreciate any counsel given in good faith, but your posts have come across as very insulting, as I’m sure they were meant to be. As far as being charitable, you may be giving it the ole college try, but you are falling short. No offense, but you have what I call “spiritual halitosis”. You may have a lot of truth to share with myself and others, but when you open your mouth, the listener (the reader of your posts), can only focus on the stench. Just a little brotherly advice, but maybe you should tame your tongue. The third chapter of James starts with the following:

3:1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2 For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. 3 If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well. 4 Look at the ships also: though they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. 5 So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things.

How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, [1] and set on fire by hell. [2] 7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. 10 From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, [3] these things ought not to be so. 11 Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? 12 Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water.

I will re-read and consider what you have posted, and I hope that you reflect on my advice. You seem to have a strong faith and you could probably do a lot to help other Christians. Peace be with you.
Understanding intent becomes easier in person, because you would see facial expressions and hear tone of voice. I repeat that you haven’t faithfully presented my intent here.

Would you tell the same to Christ for faithfully telling the truth to those who rejected such and who would not listen? The truth smells sweet, except to those who prefer their own way, or those who feel the gulf between what they have preferred and the truth.

Please allow this in the spirit of counseling. I repeat, that there was no intent to insult. For instance, the Church uses even excommunication as as a medicinal measure, hoping one will wake up and come back, as it is not used to condemn. It points out where you are in relation to the truth of the Church. The distance between where you were (that you stated publicly)and the truth, is likely why you feel or felt embarrassed. That you label it as an insult means you took it that way, not automatically that it was meant that way. I repeat that the intent was to wake you up from Catechetical slumber. Sometimes, you have to give someone a shot in the arm, or good shove to get their car moving. That you say that insult was my plan, means you really don’t understand this and it borders once again on bearing false witness. I tell you this, as we don’t really come to Christ by bending or breaking his Commandments.

I don’t believe you’ve likely encountered many people like me, and so you likely have no real reference for understanding, and therefore assess on what people you may know, who are not like me. So, it’s not surprising that you would make errant claims as you have. People in the Church who know me have a completely different view than yours. You see, I have indeed met many people in your shoes, and know them now. Yet, still we need the truth of Christ, not falsehoods. People who do not provide truth to you are not your real friends.

Another bit of counseling in that perhaps you really need to also study what is and is not charitable. True charity is in helping to lead one to Christ, which includes telling the truth, as unpleasant as that may be for one who had espoused untruths and is being corrected. For those who seek the truth, instead of simply being stuck on their own ways, the truth is received as sweet nectar.

You quote Scriptures, which is good, but we also must understand what they mean. I think some may not mean what you propose that they mean. Please continue to review the Catechism which is the greatest companion to the Scriptures.

That you continued to not get this as we went along was intriguing and I got a chuckle, but not as condemning as you seem to have taken it. I thought at one point that prayer would be the best thing. In other words, my tongue is fine, thank you. We can all get stuck on things, even that once we get unstuck, we can move forward.

I can learn how to better reach individuals, and do so continually. However, there has been no great defect as you proposed. I have also done no disservice to you.
 
Understanding intent becomes easier in person, because you would see facial expressions and hear tone of voice. I repeat that you haven’t faithfully presented my intent here.

Would you tell the same to Christ for faithfully telling the truth to those who rejected such and who would not listen? The truth smells sweet, except to those who prefer their own way, or those who feel the gulf between what they have preferred and the truth.

Please allow this in the spirit of counseling. I repeat, that there was no intent to insult. For instance, the Church uses even excommunication as as a medicinal measure, hoping one will wake up and come back, as it is not used to condemn. It points out where you are in relation to the truth of the Church. The distance between where you were (that you stated publicly)and the truth, is likely why you feel or felt embarrassed. That you label it as an insult means you took it that way, not automatically that it was meant that way. I repeat that the intent was to wake you up from Catechetical slumber. Sometimes, you have to give someone a shot in the arm, or good shove to get their car moving. That you say that insult was my plan, means you really don’t understand this and it borders once again on bearing false witness. I tell you this, as we don’t really come to Christ by bending or breaking his Commandments.

I don’t believe you’ve likely encountered many people like me, and so you likely have no real reference for understanding, and therefore assess on what people you may know, who are not like me. So, it’s not surprising that you would make errant claims as you have. People in the Church who know me have a completely different view than yours. You see, I have indeed met many people in your shoes, and know them now. Yet, still we need the truth of Christ, not falsehoods. People who do not provide truth to you are not your real friends.

Another bit of counseling in that perhaps you really need to also study what is and is not charitable. True charity is in helping to lead one to Christ, which includes telling the truth, as unpleasant as that may be for one who had espoused untruths and is being corrected. For those who seek the truth, instead of simply being stuck on their own ways, the truth is received as sweet nectar.

You quote Scriptures, which is good, but we also must understand what they mean. I think some may not mean what you propose that they mean. Please continue to review the Catechism which is the greatest companion to the Scriptures.

That you continued to not get this as we went along was intriguing and I got a chuckle, but not as condemning as you seem to have taken it. I thought at one point that prayer would be the best thing. In other words, my tongue is fine, thank you. We can all get stuck on things, even that once we get unstuck, we can move forward.

I can learn how to better reach individuals, and do so continually. However, there has been no great defect as you proposed. I have also done no disservice to you.
Let me quote a little more Sacred Scripture if you have the time or interest in reading it.

In 1 Peter 5:16 it says:

"16 Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. "

I’m not ashamed to be identified as a Christian, in fact I prefer it! I glorify God in that name! What could be better than that? What I am ashamed of is that I was acting in a way opposed to the teachings of Christ and His Apostles by not suffering through your insults and false accusations and being blessed. That’s not your fault, it’s mine.

Here’s a good example of everyone of your posts:

“Would you tell the same to Christ for faithfully telling the truth to those who rejected such and who would not listen? The truth smells sweet, except to those who prefer their own way, or those who feel the gulf between what they have preferred and the truth.”

It was obvious, or at least I thought so, that the “stench” I was referring to was the insults and demeaning remarks in your posts, and not to any of the pieces of truth that were mixed in with them. Your innuendos and insults tend to keep one focused on that aspect of your correspondence. It would be like you were trying to offer a thristy person a glass of water mixed with sewage, I don’t care how thirsty they were they wouldn’t swallow it. (Now understand that the clean water would be the truth and charity and sewage would be the insults and demeaning innuendos.) The thread started with a question about Christian unity. Every time Christians (both Catholic and Protest) start praying for Christian unity, here come’s all the “Defenders of the True Faith” and they make sure it never even gets a chance. What’s more is they believe that they’re doing God a favor. Personally, I get very tired of all the hate espoused by Christians against other Christians. Christ is the Spiritual Head of the Church and He can hold all it’s parts together. Christ is the Chief Shepard. Christ is the Spiritual Rock that was with Moses and the Israelites. Christ is the foundation. Christ died for our sins and was ressurected so that anyone that believes in him may have eternal life. These are some of the things that both the Protestants and the Catholics have in common. For Peter said in Acts 2:38-39, "And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
 
Let me quote a little more Sacred Scripture if you have the time or interest in reading it.

In 1 Peter 5:16 it says:

"16 Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. "

I’m not ashamed to be identified as a Christian, in fact I prefer it! I glorify God in that name! What could be better than that? What I am ashamed of is that I was acting in a way opposed to the teachings of Christ and His Apostles by not suffering through your insults and false accusations and being blessed. That’s not your fault, it’s mine.

Here’s a good example of everyone of your posts:

“Would you tell the same to Christ for faithfully telling the truth to those who rejected such and who would not listen? The truth smells sweet, except to those who prefer their own way, or those who feel the gulf between what they have preferred and the truth.”

It was obvious, or at least I thought so, that the “stench” I was referring to was the insults and demeaning remarks in your posts, and not to any of the pieces of truth that were mixed in with them. Your innuendos and insults tend to keep one focused on that aspect of your correspondence. It would be like you were trying to offer a thristy person a glass of water mixed with sewage, I don’t care how thirsty they were they wouldn’t swallow it. (Now understand that the clean water would be the truth and charity and sewage would be the insults and demeaning innuendos.) The thread started with a question about Christian unity. Every time Christians (both Catholic and Protest) start praying for Christian unity, here come’s all the “Defenders of the True Faith” and they make sure it never even gets a chance. What’s more is they believe that they’re doing God a favor. Personally, I get very tired of all the hate espoused by Christians against other Christians. Christ is the Spiritual Head of the Church and He can hold all it’s parts together. Christ is the Chief Shepard. Christ is the Spiritual Rock that was with Moses and the Israelites. Christ is the foundation. Christ died for our sins and was ressurected so that anyone that believes in him may have eternal life. These are some of the things that both the Protestants and the Catholics have in common. For Peter said in Acts 2:38-39, "And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
You’re still confused about what was being said. No one said you weren’t proud to be Christian, or that its’ not a good term. Where was that said at all? What you prefer is up to you. The discussion was about your false statement that the “Christian Church” preceded the “Catholic Church.” The Catholic Church is Christian and this is the same church started at Pentecost. I’ll repeat that this is like saying the woman created from Adam’s rib preceded Eve. When you present a false teaching here publicly, you’re likely to receive some correction… as has been presented to you.

Your take on my intent and what I did is nothing short of absurd. I always offered clean water, meaning the truth, in charity of wanting you to come to Christ. If you take it differently than it was intended, then that’s on you, not me. I respect God’s eighth Commandment, and am very careful about it. I ask you to please consider what you’re saying a little more carefully in light of the truth.

Regarding the quote you provided, that wasn’t in everyone of my posts in response to you. Secondly, what’s wrong with it? Like I said before, it wasn’t then, isn’t now, and never will be intended as an insult. If something is getting in your way of the truth, you need to get it out of the way. I saw many more people in this general statement than pointing it at you only, and would apply to any of us if doing that. The elements of this that I believe did apply to you… Specifically, you persisted in your own interpretation, separate from the true facts which keeps one from really enjoying the truth. One can’t really enjoy the full truth while persisting in error, can they? Secondly, you were likely embarrassed, and not yet able to fully enjoy the truth due to this. I think both of these are very fair statements. Like I’ve stated before, it was intended to wake you up. The important thing is that you need to determine if it applies to you. In other words, if that shoe fits, you really are better served by finding different shoes. If one’s pride gets in the way and so keep the same falsehoods, they’ll never really be able to fully smell the beautiful aroma of truth. Is that not a true statement, with important consequences? It’s only with humility that any of us can come to God.
 
…It was obvious, or at least I thought so, that the “stench” I was referring to was the insults and demeaning remarks in your posts, and not to any of the pieces of truth that were mixed in with them. Your innuendos and insults tend to keep one focused on that aspect of your correspondence. It would be like you were trying to offer a thristy person a glass of water mixed with sewage, I don’t care how thirsty they were they wouldn’t swallow it. (Now understand that the clean water would be the truth and charity and sewage would be the insults and demeaning innuendos.) The thread started with a question about Christian unity. Every time Christians (both Catholic and Protest) start praying for Christian unity, here come’s all the “Defenders of the True Faith” and they make sure it never even gets a chance. What’s more is they believe that they’re doing God a favor. Personally, I get very tired of all the hate espoused by Christians against other Christians. Christ is the Spiritual Head of the Church and He can hold all it’s parts together. Christ is the Chief Shepard. Christ is the Spiritual Rock that was with Moses and the Israelites. Christ is the foundation. Christ died for our sins and was ressurected so that anyone that believes in him may have eternal life. These are some of the things that both the Protestants and the Catholics have in common. For Peter said in Acts 2:38-39, "And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
You seem to see hatred in places where it may not really exist, or at least you label it as hatred. Why would this be? Is it hateful simply to have a different opinion than you, or to refute a falsehood that you present, or to present a decent idea that you didn’t consider?

Why do you criticize those who discuss the truth? Is the truth hatred to you, or somehow offensive? Is spreading the truth God’s work, or is promoting falsehoods considered God’s work? Your snide remark about “doing God a favor” is off the mark as well. For myself, I do these things because I love God, and His Body. It’s not some “favor” to Him, but it is because I love Him. It’s a work of faith. We benefit by seeking the Truth who is Christ.

Do you not know that Christ is the Way, Truth, and the Life? I bet you do, and yet you still write as though the truth is not really that important here, or not really welcome to you… getting in the way. If anyone prefers their own way, tends to believe or accept that all Christian ways tend to be equally acceptable to God, then the truth really won’t matter as much to them. Christ gave us a means for unity, and that others want to have unity outside of that is sad, and doomed to failure. Is this what you promote? We won’t have unity with false ecumenism, or building the relationships on falsehoods such as “Christian Church” preceded the “Catholic Church.” The only way it has a chance, is to do what Christ has asked. Is there any other Way, than the Truth?
 
…Christ is the Spiritual Head of the Church and He can hold all it’s parts together. Christ is the Chief Shepard. Christ is the Spiritual Rock that was with Moses and the Israelites. Christ is the foundation. Christ died for our sins and was ressurected so that anyone that believes in him may have eternal life. These are some of the things that both the Protestants and the Catholics have in common. For Peter said in Acts 2:38-39, "And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Each truth that one has can be used a stepping stone to the fullness of truth. Any of us will oppose coming to the fullness truth when we promote falsehoods, such as it was all just Christian at first, then the Catholic Church was created in the second century sometime. By doing this, people can miss out on the beautiful reality of the authoritative Church built by Christ that is the exact way to unity, teaching one set of doctrine which is correct and true, giving the true and valid Sacraments that Christ established, etc., which was not preceded by any Christian church. We oppose unity when we promote false ecumenism, like building relationships on falsehoods, like “your doctrine is just as valid as ours.” In truth, it is not. One made by Christ, the other(s) by men who are not God. As well meaning as these men may or may not have been, the two are not compatible and reconcilable. Christ’s way is the way to unity in Him. We should all be branches of the true Vine. There is only one True Vine, one Church, one true doctrine, one Eucharist. We must live on every word that comes from the mouth of God, doing what He asked us to do in order to be nourished and become fruitful branches of the vine. Telling people that it is simply okay to do it their own way, instead of God’s way, is a grave disservice to them and the rest of the Body of Christ.
 
You’re still confused about what was being said. No one said you weren’t proud to be Christian, or that its’ not a good term. Where was that said at all? What you prefer is up to you. The discussion was about your false statement that the “Christian Church” preceded the “Catholic Church.” The Catholic Church is Christian and this is the same church started at Pentecost. I’ll repeat that this is like saying the woman created from Adam’s rib preceded Eve. When you present a false teaching here publicly, you’re likely to receive some correction… as has been presented to you.

Your take on my intent and what I did is nothing short of absurd. I always offered clean water, meaning the truth, in charity of wanting you to come to Christ. If you take it differently than it was intended, then that’s on you, not me. I respect God’s eighth Commandment, and am very careful about it. I ask you to please consider what you’re saying a little more carefully in light of the truth.

Regarding the quote you provided, that wasn’t in everyone of my posts in response to you. Secondly, what’s wrong with it? Like I said before, it wasn’t then, isn’t now, and never will be intended as an insult. If something is getting in your way of the truth, you need to get it out of the way. I saw many more people in this general statement than pointing it at you only, and would apply to any of us if doing that. The elements of this that I believe did apply to you… Specifically, you persisted in your own interpretation, separate from the true facts which keeps one from really enjoying the truth. One can’t really enjoy the full truth while persisting in error, can they? Secondly, you were likely embarrassed, and not yet able to fully enjoy the truth due to this. I think both of these are very fair statements. Like I’ve stated before, it was intended to wake you up. The important thing is that you need to determine if it applies to you. In other words, if that shoe fits, you really are better served by finding different shoes. If one’s pride gets in the way and so keep the same falsehoods, they’ll never really be able to fully smell the beautiful aroma of truth. Is that not a true statement, with important consequences? It’s only with humility that any of us can come to God.
I’m not confused or mistaken. I think you were missing my point from the outset. It was the “terminology” that I was refering to. When I said that the disciples were first called “Christians” at Antioch was I correct? When I said that the term “Catholic” was not used until the second century was I correct? I never said that the Church mentioned in the Bible was not the Church refered to as the Catholic Church in the second century. in the first century the church was refered to, at least in Paul’s letter to the Roman’s as the churches of Christ. In Romans 16:16 it states.

16(A) Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.

You read my original post and misunderstood my intent and I want to apologize to you for that. Maybe I was wrong about your intentions too. In Ephesians 4:1-4:1-6 says

1 I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all .

Peace be with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top