Did Constantine start the Catholic Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IGotQuestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
Also notable…Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church are One and the Same. Some Catholics today, for whatever reason, don’t want to acknowledge this. Maybe a case of ecumenism gone wild but probably more likely the case of not accepting a teaching of Jesus but blaming it on the Church. So like protestants they separate Jesus from His Church in order to justify there disobedience.
 
Did Constantine start the Catholic Church?
I used to believe that as an Evangelical, until I discovered that even 2nd century Christians believed in baptismal regeneration, the Real Presence, and Apostolic Succession.
 
Did Constantine start the Catholic Church?
Not likely since he had a death bed conversion, i.e. he didn’t enter the Church until he was dying. And then there the clear fact that it was referred to as The Catholic Church long period before it was written about around A.D. 100, long before Constantine was even born.
 
Was not Constantine’s mother was the great St. Helena (already a believer). Pick up writings by the earliest Church Fathers, Apostolic Fathers to see it was alive & well long before Constantine. A non-Christian historian of the time (I have a book on his writings) mentioned Jesus Christ. The Church was long established 3 centuries before as other posters have discussed.

Constantine let it bubble up to the surface, go public essentially & function out in the open.
 
Sometimes it oily s necessary to put down the religious works and pick up a history or look into archaeology.
Archaeology has discovered ,they believe, the oldest house church in Dura Europa in Syria.
It had once been a crossroads.a wealthy city. The discovered that the Didache was used and used and a whole lot practices were already in place. This was about 200’s.way before Constantine even existed. This Constantine thing has as always been a bug a boo. Meaningless. Constantine, was more interested in keeping the Empire intact and sAfe. Heresy was a distraction to him and the control and safety of the Empire.
Always look for a political trail in the Roman Empire, as you look for the Money in American politics. The story is always way more complex than" Constantine started the Catholic church" politics was at the root of everything a Roman politico did.
 
The use of the word “catholic”, a simple adjective that means, universal…has done more to create division and confusion in the Body of Christ than any other unfortunate label, or name.
Its a pity that a (universal) Christianity must continue to endure this baneful circumstance.
 
Actually, you guys might want to consider the documentation backing up the claim that Constantine did do this.

Here it is
Donation of Constantine
(Lat., Donatio Constantini).
Manuscript (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS. Latin 2777)

And it bears the title: “Constitutum domni Constantini imperatoris”. It is addressed by Constantine to Pope Sylvester I (314-35) and consists of two parts. In the first (entitled “Confessio”) the emperor relates ….

In the second part (the “Donatio”) Constantine is made to confer on Sylvester and his successors the following privileges and possessions: the pope, as successor of St. Peter, has the primacy over the four Patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Jerusalem, also over all the bishops in the world. …

Okay, okay, there is one tiny weeny little problem with it. It was proved to have been written hundreds of years after the Emperor Constantine died.
Code:
    Here is a 15th Century manuscript proving that this document to be a forgery.  . Lorenzo Valla shows that the text could not have been written in the fourth century, the age of Constantine the Great, by revealing many anachronisms in form and content. It is an eighth-century forgery
loc.gov/exhibits/vatican/arch.html#obj17

**The Donation of Constantine **An excerpt from the book “The Building of Christendom”, from pgs. 294-295, Volume Two from the “History of Christendom” series by Dr. Warren Carroll
Code:
The Donation of Constantine, whose oldest manuscript cannot be surely dated before 800, purports to be a grant of quasi-imperial powers over Rome, Italy, "and all the Western regions" to silent Pope Silvester I from Constantine, whom Silvester is said to have baptized, as he went east to establish his new capital in Constantinople. That this document could not be authentic became patently obvious at the very dawn of critical historical scholarship in the Renaissance.
It was the outgrowth of a long-developed legend, the most successful of a number of efforts to fill a myth the extraordinary historical void which Silvester’s pontificate in the vitals years 314-335 presents to Christian posterity. Among the kernels of historical fact at the roots of this legend were Constantine’s grant to the church in Rome of the Lateran palace and various other buildings and benefits, during the years immediately after his conversion and the capture of Rome.

While it seems from a letter of Pope Hadrian I (772-795) to Charlemagne that Pope Hadrian was familiar with the legend, no document of Pepin’s or Charlemagne’s time specifically cites the forged donation. When it finally appears, it is in Frankish sources. No Pope officially cited it until 1054. If the Donation of Constantine was forged for Pepin and used to mislead him, no word or act of his reflects it. Neither he nor Popes Stephen III or Paul I ever claimed all of Italy for the Papacy, nor referred to Constantine or any other Roman emperors as the source of their claims.

The repeated references in the letters and documents of Pope Stephen III to demands for the return of cities from the Lombards do not by any means necessarily imply some secret reading of the Donation of Constantine. They are simply and reasonably explained and reflecting the well-founded conviction that the Lombards had no right to seize them, and should return them to the inhabitants from whom they had been taken - but not to Byzantine rule, since no Pope could have seriously considered initiating the delivery of Italian territory with its Catholic people to an iconoclast emperor who had just declared himself the equal of the apostles.

Additional resources:
Donation of Constantine - Catholic Encyclopedia
 
The use of the word “catholic”, a simple adjective that means, universal…has done more to create division and confusion in the Body of Christ than any other unfortunate label, or name.
Its a pity that a (universal) Christianity must continue to endure this baneful circumstance.
Since the beginning of Christianity, that word (Catholic) has helped believers know where they can receive the authentic faith instead of a warped, deficient or distorted faith from other entities claiming to be the true Christian church.

“And if you ever are visiting in cities, do not inquire simply where the house of the Lord is—for the others, sects of the impious, attempt to call their dens ‘houses of the Lord’—nor ask merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the name peculiar to this holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God” - Cyril of Jerusalem

Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains . Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” - Ignatius of Antioch
 
:yawn: the Donation of Constantine?

Spurious document…

Constantine did not found the Catholic Church…Jesus Christ did.
The use of the word “catholic”, a simple adjective that means, universal…has done more to create division and confusion in the Body of Christ than any other unfortunate label, or name.
Its a pity that a (universal) Christianity must continue to endure this baneful circumstance.
You’d have to take that up with the early church since the term is used in the Greek in Acts 9 :31 where it uses the term ecclessia kath olos for “the church throughout all” and then of course when St. Ignatius of Antioch tells the church at Smyrna,
CHAP. VIII.–LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP.

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.(2) even as where Christ is, there does all the heavenly host stand by, waiting upon Him as the Chief Captain of the Lord’s might, and the Governor of every intelligent nature. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize, or to offer, or to present sacrifice, or to celebrate a love-feast.(1) But that which seems good to him, is also well-pleasing to God, that everything ye do may be secure and valid.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top