Commandments

[guanophore]

Not quite. The division between Catholic and Orthodox had many reasons. The most important doctrinal issue is the role of the Pope (Bishop of Rome). That is, surely, a point of doctrine, right? All Catholic recognize and adhere to the authority of the Pope, right? Orthodox do not.

Right?

Yes, but the schism was not a result of the dispute over the role of the Pope. The East has always respected the successor of Peter as first among equals. The schism was a result of pride and cultural barriers (language). It became clear that there were no doctrinal differences, and the mutual excommunications were lifted. Since that time, other issues have emerged that are doctrinal, but the original split, unlike the Reformation, did not have to do with either side “creating” doctrines that were a departure from the Apostolic faith. This is one reason that Rome recognizes the valid Apostolic succession and Sacraments in the East.

 

[diggerdomer]

Yes, but the schism was not a result of the dispute over the role of the Pope. The East has always respected the successor of Peter as first among equals. The schism was a result of pride and cultural barriers (language). It became clear that there were no doctrinal differences, and the mutual excommunications were lifted. Since that time, other issues have emerged that are doctrinal, but the original split, unlike the Reformation, did not have to do with either side “creating” doctrines that were a departure from the Apostolic faith. This is one reason that Rome recognizes the valid Apostolic succession and Sacraments in the East.

The schism was a result of many factors. Including the role of the Pope (Bishop of Rome).

Whether the East has always considered the Bishop of Rome as first among equals is part ot his point, and likewise, whether the Roman Church agreed with that perception. The point is, they differed, and along with other reasons, this lead to schism.

It only became clear much later that there were no other doctrinal differences…much later!

You claim the schism was a result of pride…perhaps…but if so, pride on both sides. No?

The reason that Rome recognizes the valid Apostolic succession and Sacraments of the Orthodox Church has nothing to do with with Reformation, as such recognition existed centuries before the Reformation.

 

[benidict]

I agree that " the apostles and other authors of scripture recorded the teachings of the apostles for the" church. However, I do not agree that the “church” was Catholic. Is there anywhere else in scripture other than Mat 16:18, which the Catholic Church believes the catholic Church is the “Church”.

would you please provide scriptural reference.

Thanks Brian

well my friend, lets see. in some of his parables, Jesus talks about the bridegroom and the bride. not “brides”. Jesus is not a polygamist. there was always meant to be one Church. it was first known as The Way, later followers of Christ were called Christians, and not no long after that the term Universal or “Catholic” if you will, was used to identify the one Church. Christ also promised that the gates of hell would not prevail. and they have not. you have to look at more than just scripture to find the Church Christ and his apostles founded. you have to look at history. anyone scholar who is truly honest, “even protestant ones”, will tell you that it is the Catholic Church and only the Catholic Church that can trace its inception to Christ. Peace

 

[BTTG]

well my friend, lets see. in some of his parables, Jesus talks about the bridegroom and the bride. not “brides”. Jesus is not a polygamist. there was always meant to be one Church. it was first known as The Way, later followers of Christ were called Christians, and not no long after that the term Universal or “Catholic” if you will, was used to identify the one Church. Christ also promised that the gates of hell would not prevail. and they have not. you have to look at more than just scripture to find the Church Christ and his apostles founded. you have to look at history. anyone scholar who is truly honest, “even protestant ones”, will tell you that it is the Catholic Church and only the Catholic Church that can trace its inception to Christ. Peace

Hi Brian

If Peter was the “rock”, and was given the keys, does this mean that Peter was Catholic?

craig

 

[ProVobis]

Hi Brian

If Peter was the “rock”, and was given the keys, does this mean that Peter was Catholic?

craig

We only had Christians back then. The term Catholic Church wasn’t used till 110 AD.

newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm

As a note on the light side, probably not too many remember replying “Is the Pope Italian?” by some to anything of an affirmative nature. Then since JPII, they started dropped that completely in favor of “Is the Pope Catholic.”

 

[BTTG]

We only had Christians back then. The term Catholic Church wasn’t used till 110 AD.

newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm

As a note on the light side, probably not too many remember replying “Is the Pope Italian?” by some to anything of an affirmative nature. Then since JPII, they started dropped that completely in favor of “Is the Pope Catholic.”

thank you

Who was the first person in history to say that in Mat. 16:18, that the “church” was the Catholic Church?

 

[diggerdomer]

The schism between East and West was not the result of changing the doctrine, like the Reformation division. It did not involve the creation of heretical doctrines.

1. Of course it involved a difference of doctrine: the Pope.
2. There were previous divisions among Christians that also involved doctrine (such divisions endure to this day).

 

[guanophore]

Hi Brian

If Peter was the “rock”, and was given the keys, does this mean that Peter was Catholic?

craig

Absolutely! All the Apostles and their disciples were Catholic. In fact, all the Christians were Catholic up until the schism in 1054, and the Protestant Reformation in 1600’s. During the Reformation, believers abandoned the Church founded by Christ on the Rock of Peter, and formed their own ecclesial communities. These communities were defined by which part, and how much, of the Apsotolic (Catholic) faith they deny.

 

[guanophore]

thank you

Who was the first person in history to say that in Mat. 16:18, that the “church” was the Catholic Church?

There was no need to 'say" such a thing. Luke describes the Church as kath holos in Acts. 9:31. The term was in regular use by the time it was found in the Ignatius in 107 AD. The real question is, when was the first time someone suggested that the “church” in that passage was NOT Catholic! That was an invention of the Protestant Reformation, about 1500 years after the fact.

The NT is a CAtholic book, written by, for, and about Catholics. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic.

 

[guanophore]

1. Of course it involved a difference of doctrine: the Pope.

No. The Eastern Church has always affirmed the primacy of the See of Peter.

1. There were previous divisions among Christians that also involved doctrine (such divisions endure to this day).

It is off topic for me to ask about these. With regard to the thread topic, the whole Church, both East and West, agree that the Resurrection of Christ is to be celebrated on the first day of the week, and that the Sabbath is fulfilled in Christ. Thus, we are no longer bound by the code of regulations in the OT regarding the observance of the Sabbath.

 

[benidict]

Hi Brian

If Peter was the “rock”, and was given the keys, does this mean that Peter was Catholic?

craig

well…my names not bryan…lol! thats ok though. Catholic means universal. one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. so yes Peter was and is Catholic. ill let you in on a little secret. our God is not the God of the dead, but of the Living. Peace to you and yours.

 

[diggerdomer]

No. The Eastern Church has always affirmed the primacy of the See of Peter.

Nope. Here’s where we need to be more clear. Your post I responded to simply mentioned the East/West division, without clarifying Orthodox/Catholic.

Yes, Eastern CATHOLIC Churches recognize the primacy of the Pope (Bishop of Rome).

But it’s inaccurate to say “the Eastern Church” has always recognized such…see, for example, the division (Great Schism) between Catholic and Orthodox Christian Churches. Again, as I noted, this division was based in part on doctrinal elements such as the role of the Pope. And this endures, lamentably, to this day.

Also, to be clear, many current Eastern Catholic Churches had been Eastern Orthodox Church communities who, after the Great Schism, returned to full communion of the Catholic Church.

There are no doctrinal differences between Catholics (whether Eastern or Western). There are doctrinal between Eastern and Western, i.e. Orthodox and Catholic, churches.

 

[BTTG]

In Gen. it states that God blessed and sanctified the seventh day. Many believe that after the Crucifixion of Jesus that the seventh day is no longer blessed and sanctified because we have a Sabbath rest in Jesus all week. I agree that we are to rest in Jesus all week.
However, it is Jesus that blessed and sanctified the seventh day during the creation week. Jesus says I am the Alpha and the Omega, God knows the beginning and the end of the world.

Does this mean that after the Crucifixion that God said, ignore that seventh day that I mentioned during creation, a day that is to be holy and blessed. I changed my mind, I now want the first day of the week to be holy and blessed. Remember, God stated this before their were any Jews on the earth.

 

[guanophore]

In Gen. it states that God blessed and sanctified the seventh day. Many believe that after the Crucifixion of Jesus that the seventh day is no longer blessed and sanctified because we have a Sabbath rest in Jesus all week. I agree that we are to rest in Jesus all week.
However, it is Jesus that blessed and sanctified the seventh day during the creation week. Jesus says I am the Alpha and the Omega, God knows the beginning and the end of the world.

Does this mean that after the Crucifixion that God said, ignore that seventh day that I mentioned during creation, a day that is to be holy and blessed. I changed my mind, I now want the first day of the week to be holy and blessed. Remember, God stated this before their were any Jews on the earth.

No, God did not change His mind. He fulfulled His plan in Christ, who is our sabbath rest. We are His new creation, and we celebrate the Lord’s Day (the first day of the week) to honor the resurrection that made it possible for us to become that new creation.

 

[Robbinson]

No, God did not change His mind. He fulfulled His plan in Christ, who is our sabbath rest. We are His new creation, and we celebrate the Lord’s Day (the first day of the week) to honor the resurrection that made it possible for us to become that new creation.

 

[BTTG]

What do you mean “new creation”?

Where in the Bible does it say that a day should be set aside in honor of His resurrection?

How/what do you do to observe Sunday?

 

[guanophore]

What do you mean “new creation”?

Does your sect not subscribe to the new creation that believers are in Christ?

Where in the Bible does it say that a day should be set aside in honor of His resurrection?

Your question assumes that the Bible is a complete compendium of all Christian faith and practice, which is not the case.

In Scripture, we see that the early Christians gathered on “the Lord’s Day”(the first day of the week) to celebrate the breaking of the bread.

How/what do you do to observe Sunday?

The observance of Sunday as a day of rest is part of the Catholic Sacred Tradition.

 

[adrift]

No, God did not change His mind. He fulfulled His plan in Christ, who is our sabbath rest. We are His new creation, and we celebrate the Lord’s Day (the first day of the week) to honor the resurrection that made it possible for us to become that new creation.

This posted in Ask an Expert is a very good explanation.

 

[BTTG]

This posted in Ask an Expert is a very good explanation.

The “ask the expert” states: Nobody “changed” the Sabbath, and the Sabbath isn’t on Sunday. The Sabbath was and remains the seventh day, Saturday. What happened is that the Church Jesus founded to teach in his name, the Catholic Church, determined that it is no longer necessary for Christians to observe “the Sabbath” because the Sabbath is a Jewish holiday that is not binding on Christians. Instead, Christians observe the Lord’s Day on Sunday, in honor of the first day of the week when Jesus rose from the dead and the Holy Spirit descended on the Church. Because the moral requirement of the third commandment (the Sabbath commandment) that humans set aside sufficient time to worship God and rest from labor remains valid, the Church transferred the moral obligation for communal worship and rest to Sunday.

The Sabbath “day” was not a holiday. There were Sabbath holidays that were abolished at the cross, but not the Sabbath “day” of worship. It was the day that Jesus made Holy and Blessed before Jews even existed. How can it be a Jewish holiday, if the seventh ( Sabbath day) day and the 10 commandments were established before the Jews? As the expert states it was not God who changed the day of worship and rest from Saturday to Sunday , but through the authority of the church. When the Jews,including the likes of Moses, Elijah, King David, etc. were worshiping on the Sabbath was this just a “holiday”, or a “Holy Day” ?

 

[guanophore]

The “ask the expert” states: Nobody “changed” the Sabbath, and the Sabbath isn’t on Sunday. The Sabbath was and remains the seventh day, Saturday. What happened is that the Church Jesus founded to teach in his name, the Catholic Church, determined that it is no longer necessary for Christians to observe “the Sabbath” because the Sabbath is a Jewish holiday that is not binding on Christians.

Jesus chose to rise on the first day of the week, rather than the seventh. He chose to appear to His disciples sequentially on the first day of the week, rather than the seventh. they developed a pattern of gathering and looking for Him to appear on that day. If he did not want this, I am sure He would have let them know.

 Instead, Christians observe the Lord's Day on Sunday, in honor of the first day of the week when Jesus rose from the dead and the Holy Spirit descended on the Church. Because the moral requirement of the third commandment (the Sabbath commandment) that humans set aside sufficient time to worship God and rest from labor remains valid, the Church transferred the moral obligation for communal worship and rest to Sunday.

The Sabbath “day” was not a holiday.

Actually, it was, and this was one of the reasons that the official change was made. In the first three centuries of the church, some Christians gathered on the Sabbath, and some on The Lord’s Day (Sunday). This was very disruptive to commerce as the faith spread, as half the Christians would not do work or business on the Sabbath, and the other half wanted Sunday to observe their faith. One of the main goals of Constantine in convening the Nicean council was his request to the Bishops that they CHOOSE ONE day to be a “holiday” during which the Empire would not do business, so that commerce would not be interruped on both days.

There were Sabbath holidays that were abolished at the cross, but not the Sabbath “day” of worship. It was the day that Jesus made Holy and Blessed before Jews even existed. How can it be a Jewish holiday, if the seventh ( Sabbath day) day and the 10 commandments were established before the Jews?

Because the Jews were the only custodians of God’s revelation on that point. Only they, of all the created peoples of the world, retained the commandment of God about the Sabbath.

As the expert states it was not God who changed the day of worship and rest from Saturday to Sunday , but through the authority of the church. When the Jews,including the likes of Moses, Elijah, King David, etc. were worshiping on the Sabbath was this just a “holiday”, or a “Holy Day” ?

I am not sure what “just a holiday” means to you, but to Rome, it meant that no commerce was done by those observing Sabbath as a Holy Day.