Constantine invented Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Quaestor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BlackFriar said:
There is some truth to it.
We still haven’t escaped an over emphasis on legalism, blind obedience and aggressive evangelisation and one true Church mentality.
Click to expand...
When you wrote the following (emphasis mine)

“We still haven’t escaped an over emphasis on legalism, blind obedience and aggressive evangelisation and one true Church mentality.”

I responded

"over emphasis? Really?
Looking over your posts I am seeing a theme
Click to expand...
 
40.png
steve-b:
When you wrote the following (emphasis mine)
“We still haven’t escaped an over emphasis on legalism, blind obedience and aggressive evangelisation and one true Church mentality.”
I responded "over emphasis? Really?
Looking over your posts I am seeing a theme
Click to expand...
???
 
Quaestor said:
Remember for Jews the point at which conversion occurs is the mikveh (baptism), circumcision makes you a son of the Law. The Church during the time of the apostles already loosened the requirement that one become a son of the Law, because this is not a requirement only the mikveh is.
Click to expand...
I have been doing some research on this at the time of Jesus.
Its not really as black and white as you suggest is it?
Like many things, there were strong disagreements on this in Judaism.

Further it seems a reach to even moderately identify Christian baptism with traditional Judaic Mikvah…though I am surprised at the superficial similarities in its usage for receiving Gentiles into Judaism before the time of Jesus.
 
I am afraid I really have no idea what you are trying to say or why you would question my Catholicism because of my quoted statement.
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
40.png
BlackFriar:
You just proved my point.
What more needs to be said.
Click to expand...
Is that a question?
Click to expand...
I think that what more needs to be said, is what the curia requested from Pope Francis. They requested clarification regarding matters of the faith. When a previous pope and Congregation for Doctrine of Faith specifically states that specific situation cannot change the necessity of unlawfully married to refrain from sexual relations, and Pope Francis ambiguously seems to say otherwise, then more does need to be said from him. To simply say “It’s Thomistic” is insufficient.

Until he does, I think that it’s safe to accept the assessment of then Prefect Gerhard Ludwig Müller. Which criticized the assumption of several Bishops that sexual relations between certain couples in unlawful unions can sometimes continue while receiving Sacraments.
 
Last edited:
Why are you addressing Circumcision to support your correlation between a Mikvey and Christian Baptism?
 
You may believe that it is stupid that Constantine started from scratch the Catholic Church
Please quote where you believe I said that?
You said it here.
My simple point is that it would be obtuse to believe that the poster means Constantine created the Christian Church from scratch.
Click to expand...
it is silly to attempt a serious debate over the proposition that today’s Catholic Church was wholly founded and invented by Constantine around 300AD.
Click to expand...
You may have thought you said that But you didn’t. Your first statement seemed to support that there was some truth to it. The “it” would be that Constantine invented Catholicism
 
Last edited:
Nor is it clear what is meant by “Catholicism”.
Contributers here seem to use the word indiscrimantly with different meanings.
Click to expand...
Good luck with that definition working the same in Jesus’s time, Paul’s time, Ignatius of Antioch’s time, Constantine’s time, the time of the great Schism, the time of the Reformists and finally today.
Click to expand...
Your statement was not about what it meant in Jesus’s time, Paul’s time, Ignatius of Antioch’s time, Constantine’s time, the time of the great Schism, the time of the Reformists but what the “Contributers” HERE use the word. I disagree that they use it indiscriminately or with a different meaning than which I defined it.
 
I think there can be a consistent understanding of the term “Catholic” (which is the root concept of Catholicism ) going all the way back to the earliest source we have in literature by St Ignatius.

It is a label referring to both a universal and orthodox church institution.

Maybe Ignatius could be considered a father of the term (though not the originator), and therefore be a witness to a certain amount of its principles.
 
De_Maria said:
The point is, that you admit and accept that the Catholic Church selected and compiled the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
You have a habit of making inductive leaps. I have noticed that in a lot of your posts.

Your point is incorrect. To be frank, I dont have the answer for that assertion. At least not one I would hang my hat on.

I do know that there is a lot of controversy about the term “catholic” as opposed to the term “Catholic” and its early usage. But even if were true, which I have doubts about, but even so, The “Church” definitely went apostate at some point in history, murdering true followers, infiltrating kingdoms and such. Do you want to call that one “Catholic”?
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
I think there can be a consistent understanding of the term “Catholic” (which is the root concept of Catholicism ) going all the way back to the earliest source we have in literature by St Ignatius.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he meant it as a noun, but as an adjective, did he?
 
I dont believe any reformer believes that Constantine created the Catholic church from scratch. Its more correct to say that reformers look at the historical evidence and see that Constantine was a nominal christian at best, and with an unregenerated heart, brought in many unchristian doctrines and especially, rituals to the Church. Ok, I realize that is going to cause a little sting, but that is how it is. That is what is believed by real protestants.

But there is more. Protestants familiar with the history, do not call this Church “Catholic” - it wasnt until after this pollution occurred that the term “Catholic” was added. I know that this overlaps the controversy about the usage of the term, “Catholic”, but if you think about it, it kind of shows that protestants know it was the formal Church that started going astray. There was no “Catholic” term assigned to the Church yet. That was later.

I dont known why we have to dance around this fact that this is what Protestants believe? That is just how it is.
 
Last edited:
lexscripta said:
The “Church” definitely went apostate at some point in history, murdering true followers, infiltrating kingdoms and such. Do you want to call that one “Catholic”?
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church:
  1. Did not go apostate. In fact, the Catholic Church is the only Church which has remained orthodox throughout history.
  2. The Catholic Church has murdered no one. The only persons who have died in the Catholic Church are Ananias and his wife, and technically, the Holy Spirit took their life. (Acts 5)
  3. All the kingdoms that submitted to the Catholic Church, did so voluntarily because their kings were Catholic.
  4. And, any person in the history of mankind who has committed any sin, has done it in spite of Catholic Teaching. Not because of it.
 
rcwitness said:
Maybe Ignatius could be considered a father of the term (though not the originator), and therefore be a witness to a certain amount of its principles
Click to expand...
"Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. " St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, AD 107.

I agree with you RC that Ignatius was probably not the originator of the term. Ron Bennett’s work Four Witnesses: The Early Church in Her Own Words (and where I got the above quote from St. Ignatius) says that St. Ignatius seems to use the term in a manner that would imply that his readers were already familiar with the term (page 135).
 
I don’t know how you can speak for all of what “Protestants” believe, other than the basic tenants that make them validly Christian (which we know by Catholic standards).

A genuine Catholic parish does not desire to have a different body of Teachings than any other parish throughout the globe. And thank God that He established a leadership of offices which allow us to maintain this reality.

Now, this never means we are free from individuals who cause division. We will always have, and even be ourselves, members who bring sins into our parish. But our parish is a part of the tangible, visible, catholic Church throughout the world.
 
Last edited:
lexscripta said:
brought in many unchristian doctrines and especially, rituals to the Church.
Click to expand...
Lexscripta

Would you please provide us with a list of the doctrines and rituals that Constantine is supposed to have introduced?
 
Hence, his edict that all - thats everybody - come to worship on the “venerable day of the sun”, his own proclamation
Click to expand...
What you do not seem to acknowledge is that Christians had been worshiping on Sunday since Acts was written.

Early Church History
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top