Did Jesus Start the Catholic Church?

[tqualey]

Hi, Rinnie,

Before anything else, I sincerely request that you read, absorb and apply the message that Benedictus2 has given you. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all of her statements criticizing your statements on theology are correct. Continuing to make statements that others are telling you are flase - and spreading these false statements to others (we do not know who is reading these posts) can be serious matter.

My recommendation would be to print these posts and bring them to your local parish priest and discuss them with him. You can not lose doing this - and you will be talking to someone you have some kind of contact with (as opposed to an impersonal link or radio response or what-have-you). But, if you don’t go to your priest (someone knowledgeable in theology) then take Benedictus2’s ideas on where to take these concerns.

Now, concerning the baptism of infants. Here is a link that will provide you with excellent information: newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm

The Parents stand up for the infant and respond to the questions asked of them on behalf of the infant. The Godparents (sponsors) are there to serve in the event the Parents are unable to bring the child up as a Catholic and to serve as a role model for the growing child. Here is link you may find helpful: catholic-forum.com/churches/244ic/icc_baptism.html

I suggest you consider very carefully before quoting Rev Kev - an acknowledged apostate from the Catholic Faith. He has made numerous efforts to discredit the Catholic Church and claim Christ did not found our Chruch on Peter. Truly, by their fruits you will know them applies just as much today as it did when Christ was recorded as saying them in Matthew 7:16. From what I have seen, you have been really mixing things up and the outcome is simply mis-statements about the Catholic Faith. This can not be spreading the good you want to spread - of this I am sure.

Now, don’t pull a Rev Kev and change - or, try to change - what you said. I copied and pasted your words and you were talking about CHILDREN not infants. Honest, if you question what I copied, go back to your own post #850 and read your second to last sentence. I really did read what you wrote … and, I really do disagree with what you wrote. This is NOT a matter of interpretation, but simply reading what is there - and, in my opinion it is not clear.

The ball is in your court at this point. Whether something I said could have been said better or with more charity or kindness really isn’t the issue. The issue is what you actually wrote. I really can say no more on this. If you want a further discussion, than I suggest a new thread.

God bless

What does the faith of the God Parents have to do with the infant having Faith. Rev Kev said that you must have faith to be Baptised. This is not the teaching of the RCC. As I stated if faith were a requirement babys could not be Baptised. Then I stated that Baptism of infants have always been a Practice of the RCC.

And what I showed him, Christ has given us the Sacraments in the Church for a reason. To show how an outward sign the pouring of water over the head of an Infant, is in turn and inward sign the pouring of the Holy Spirit.

As far as the Church being the building of God, Jesus himself compared it to the building of God. The stone the builders rejected has become the corner stone. That has always been taught in the RCC.

 

[rinnie]

The Church has been always been called the building of God.

The Lord as I showed you told us that himself. The stone the builders rejected has become the corner stone.

On this foundation the Church is built by the Apostles and from it the Church receives unity.

We have always referred to the Church as the House of God in which the family dwells.
The household of God in the Spirit.
The DWELLING PLACE OF GOD among Men.
The Holy Temple.

This temple symbolized in places of worship build out of stone.It is compared in the Liturgy as the Holy City, the New Jerusalem. As living stones we here on earth are built into it.

In this age of the Church Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church. We have always been taught that Seated at the right hand of the Father and pouring out his Holy Spirit on his Body which is the Church.

Christ now acts through his sacraments he instituted to communicate his Grace.

Christ is always present in his Church, by her liturgical celebrations, in the Eucharist. He is present in his word. Since it is he who speaks when his word is read. He is present when we sing, when we pray, for where 2 or 3 are gathered together in my name there AM I in the midst of them.

Where there is the Catholic Church there is Christ. That has always been taught.

 

[rinnie]

Hi Rev Kev. Now we have to go back and see what Baptism truly is. Now is it a symbol or is at an actual outpouring of the Holy Spirit. See what I am saying?

We are taught that Baptism is an outward sign, instituted by Christ to give Grace.

Now Baptism is a Sacrament. It is something that is done outwardly to show something that takes place inward.

Now with that said, if Baptism takes faith, a baby cannot be Baptised. What Baptism IS first of all it is what configures us to Christ. It seals us with the Spiritual Mark. It is what makes us belong to Christ.

Now Baptism is our MARK of belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark. Even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of Salvation.

That is why Baptism given once cannot be repeated. Type in 1280 of the CCC. It will explain this better.

Since the earliest of times, Baptism has been administered to Children. It is a Gift of God that does NOT require any human merit.

I know what I said, I said that if baptism takes faith a baby could not be baptised. Where did I ever state that Baptism to infants was every forbidden by the RCC. Please show me.

 

[benedictus2]

Christ is always present in his Church, by her liturgical celebrations, in the Eucharist. He is present in his word. Since it is he who speaks when his word is read. He is present when we sing, when we pray, for where 2 or 3 are gathered together in my name there AM I in the midst of them.

Where there is the Catholic Church there is Christ. That has always been taught.

Yes, yes, yes. Christ DWELLS in the Church, but this is something you must burn into your mind: the the Dwelling Place IS NOT the Dweller.

The family dwells in the house but the family is not the house.

The water dwells in the vase, but the water is not the vase.

And yes, where the Catholic Church is there is Christ not because the Catholic Church is Christ but because Christ is present in the Church.

That is why we call the Church building Church because even in the absence of the people of God, it remains a Church because God remains in our Tabernacles.

Container is not the Contained.

 

[rev_kevin]

rinnie;7535515]Hi Rev Kev. Now we have to go back and see what Baptism truly is. Now is it a symbol or is at an actual outpouring of the Holy Spirit. See what I am saying?

We are taught that Baptism is an outward sign, instituted by Christ to give Grace.

Yes

Now Baptism is a Sacrament. It is something that is done outwardly to show something that takes place inward.

OK

Now with that said, if Baptism takes faith, a baby cannot be Baptised. What Baptism IS first of all it is what configures us to Christ. It seals us with the Spiritual Mark. It is what makes us belong to Christ.

OK but what does the Bible say about baptism, it says believe, and it says faith. I don’t see where it say anything different.

Now Baptism is our MARK of belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark. Even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of Salvation.

OK

That is why Baptism given once cannot be repeated. Type in 1280 of the CCC. It will explain this better.

I don’t see the harm in being baptized again if you want to.

Since the earliest of times, Baptism has been administered to Children. It is a Gift of God that does NOT require any human merit.

I have not seen where baptism was administered to Children.

 

[guanophore]

Meaning, you don’t believe Acts 2:38; you don’t believe Titus 3:5; you don’t believe Acts 22:16, and you don’t believe 1 Peter 3:21.

placido

It is amazing how much scripture and history one must have to reject to embrace the heresy that baptism is not regenerative.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Is this the same thread we went through The Pius doctrine on the “Mystical Body of Christ”? Anyway, back to that hey

Anyway as far as Baptism. I don’t see where there’s much doubt about regenerative action. May be to actually read it?

Acts 22:16 " And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

As far as Children in Baptism in the CC, this seems to be another point of contention. This was also dated very early in the Catholic Church. This isn’t to say that conversion was also still required for adults in many case’s before Baptism. Augustine of Hippo writes about this in his own life. But we have to consider that Christology wasn’t what it is today. You realize they martryed the first 300-years of the elect? Souls were at stake, and the elect had much to consider. Also if you consider the lifespan in this period? If you made it to 40 you beat the odds.

Anyway, infant baptism is recorded in the works of Origen 185-254 AD. and states…

“Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin… In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.”

Luke 18:16 Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God’" (Luke 18:15–16).

So it comes down to the Protestant thinking that Baptism is simply an outward sign which is a profession of faith, and in essense a choice to be “born again” and somewhat of a consecration to God at this point. So I suppose you can leave come back do it again. Or do whatever you do by this logic.

Not so in the Catholic Church we believe something very profound and mystical happens during Baptism which is a Blessing from God. We believe the Bible when it says that Baptism washes away sin. And we also believe at this point you enter into a covenant with God and your soul is given to the Trinity. So in essense Baptism is a supernatural union with God and a lifeline exists from this point on with the Lord.

No different than a soul which is sold to satan in satanic ritual. In the Catholic Faith the Soul is going to God. And this is how high the stakes are. The only question is “if” you chose to believe the truth or not. For hundreds of years Catholic’s wouldn’t even leave the house with a baby and when they did it was to go directly to Baptism “first”.

Its amazing how Protestants chose to downplay “everything”. Do you actually think you’ll stumble your way into Gods world through rationalization?

 

[rinnie]

Yes

OK

OK but what does the Bible say about baptism, it says believe, and it says faith. I don’t see where it say anything different.

OK

I don’t see the harm in being baptized again if you want to.

I have not seen where baptism was administered to Children.

Okay here is a easier way to see it. In the O.T there was no Baptism right? They had circumcision. Now babies were circumcised, You can see that right?

Okay now when Christ died on the cross he replaced circumcision with Baptism. Now it has the same meaning. To unite us to God. The would be the easiest way to show you that babies were indeed circumcised. Now a baby could not have faith yet, see what I am saying. That is why the Church does also not require faith. It is when a baby is Baptised that it gets Grace from God, and the sooner you have grace the better.

Here is why the Church teaches you can only be Baptised once. To make it in easy terms once God gives you the Grace of baptism you cannot lose that grace. You know how when you are baptised you are reborn in Christ. Okay once you are born in Christ you can never die. The soul has been free from sin. It has eternal life in Christ.

Now we can lose eternal life in Christ if we choose to reject him. but now it is our choice, God gave us free will. While he gave us free grace by no merit of our own, we must live in that grace and grow in it. And now we must live for him. If we choose to reject him, we throw that grace away by sin and cannot gain eternal life. But remember he is merciful and has given us also free will to turn back to him. all we have to do is repent and free ourself from our sin and we can again remain back in his grace.

That is simply because there is no sin that he did not pay for that we could commit. All we have to do is ask him to forgive us give a good confession and quit the sin, then we are back in his good grace.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, GaryTaylor,

A truly excellent post!

God bless

Is this the same thread we went through The Pius doctrine on the “Mystical Body of Christ”? Anyway, back to that hey

Anyway as far as Baptism. I don’t see where there’s much doubt about regenerative action. May be to actually read it?

Acts 22:16 " And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

As far as Children in Baptism in the CC, this seems to be another point of contention. This was also dated very early in the Catholic Church. This isn’t to say that conversion was also still required for adults in many case’s before Baptism. Augustine of Hippo writes about this in his own life. But we have to consider that Christology wasn’t what it is today. You realize they martryed the first 300-years of the elect? Souls were at stake, and the elect had much to consider. Also if you consider the lifespan in this period? If you made it to 40 you beat the odds.

Anyway, infant baptism is recorded in the works of Origen 185-254 AD. and states…

“Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin… In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.”

Luke 18:16 Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God’" (Luke 18:15–16).

So it comes down to the Protestant thinking that Baptism is simply an outward sign which is a profession of faith, and in essense a choice to be “born again” and somewhat of a consecration to God at this point. So I suppose you can leave come back do it again. Or do whatever you do by this logic.

Not so in the Catholic Church we believe something very profound and mystical happens during Baptism which is a Blessing from God. We believe the Bible when it says that Baptism washes away sin. And we also believe at this point you enter into a covenant with God and your soul is given to the Trinity. So in essense Baptism is a supernatural union with God and a lifeline exists from this point on with the Lord.

No different than a soul which is sold to satan in satanic ritual. In the Catholic Faith the Soul is going to God. And this is how high the stakes are. The only question is “if” you chose to believe the truth or not. For hundreds of years Catholic’s wouldn’t even leave the house with a baby and when they did it was to go directly to Baptism “first”.

Its amazing how Protestants chose to downplay “everything”. Do you actually think you’ll stumble your way into Gods world through rationalization?

 

[benedictus2]

Is this the same thread we went through The Pius doctrine on the “Mystical Body of Christ”? Anyway, back to that hey

Not really. We are still at the stage whether the Catholic Church is the one that Jesus started.

 

[benedictus2]

Is this the same thread we went through The Pius doctrine on the “Mystical Body of Christ”? Anyway, back to that hey

Okay here is a easier way to see it. In the O.T there was no Baptism right? They had circumcision. Now babies were circumcised, You can see that right?

Can I ask every one to please stick to the topic? I think we need to address the thread question and not get into the sacraments as this tends to derail the thread.

Many thanks,

Cory

 

[benedictus2]

Hi Rev Kevin,

I asked you earlier if you believe what you copy and pasted at post 830.

Do you really believe that Peter is not the rock and that you subscribe to the petros/petra controversy?

Thanks,

Cory

 

[GaryTaylor]

Not really. We are still at the stage whether the Catholic Church is the one that Jesus started.

Oh I didn’t re-read, I remember the same conversation though from somewhere with you guys.

Anyway Good Morning, and I hear you.

 

[rinnie]

It is amazing how much scripture and history one must have to reject to embrace the heresy that baptism is not regenerative.

Oh but guan, what is more amazing is when one truly learns the scripture and history and begins to really understand what it means, what the grace of God can do to that person.

Could you even imagine how hard it would be to learn what you were taught all of your life was not what was taught by Christ and his Church.

I mean to misunderstand what you Church teaches is easy to accept. Because the truth was always there, it was your fault not the teachings. But to learn that the teaching’s were wrong.

If I were to learn that the RCC was not the truth, and knowing that I believed it all of my life that would destroy me. It would be like losing yourself. You would lose a part of your own identity in a way.

I could see myself not wanting to face the truth also if that were the case. I thank God every day for letting me be the one to not have to go through that. It has to be so hard.

I never understood what my Husband really gave up when he married me until now. While I can see what he gained I can also see that there is always a loss with a gain. I can see what a difference the CC had to be for him. But like I said God’s Grace is amazing!! And God will never give you more then you can handle. But he never said it would be easy I guess.

 

[rinnie]

Yes, yes, yes. Christ DWELLS in the Church, but this is something you must burn into your mind: the the Dwelling Place IS NOT the Dweller.

The family dwells in the house but the family is not the house.

The water dwells in the vase, but the water is not the vase.

And yes, where the Catholic Church is there is Christ not because the Catholic Church is Christ but because Christ is present in the Church.

That is why we call the Church building Church because even in the absence of the people of God, it remains a Church because God remains in our Tabernacles.

Container is not the Contained.

Now its my turn.

I said that Christ is the Church. Did Christ or did he not say that his body is the temple. Yes or No? Was he not saying that when he would destroy the temple and raise it again he meant his Body. Is that not what the CC teaches and has always taught.

Is it or is it not the teaching of the CC that the Eucharist is the Heart and Soul of the Church’s life. Yes or No? Are we not taught that by his sacrifice he pours out the graces of Salvation On his body which is the Church? Yes or No?

 

[rinnie]

The Eucharist is the Sacrament of the Church in which bread and wine become the true body and blood of our dear lord Jesus Christ who delivers us from sin and death.

The Eucharist is the life of the Church, The Eucharist is how we become one in Christ with him. Rather it is Christ through the Sacrament or how he walked this earth in his earthly body it is still Christ.

That is what I have said from day one and you continue to try to turn my words around and make them what you want them to be.

I said Christ is saying us through the Church by his True body and blood rather we see him in his physical body or not.

I said from day one that there is no difference between the Power that our Lord had rather he was here walking the earth or in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. It is still the same saving power that comes from God.

Jesus proclaimed that he was the anointed from the beginning of his ministry.

I have said and will repeat for the LAST TIME.

The liberation and Salvation brought by the Kingdom of GOD come to the human person in both his PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL DIMENSIONS. This is and always has been the teaching of the CC.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Reinnie,

I am delighted you have decided to make this the last time you’ll repeat these statements.

Now, do you think Jesus started the Catholic Church?

God bless

The Eucharist is the Sacrament of the Church in which bread and wine become the true body and blood of our dear lord Jesus Christ who delivers us from sin and death.

The Eucharist is the life of the Church, The Eucharist is how we become one in Christ with him. Rather it is Christ through the Sacrament or how he walked this earth in his earthly body it is still Christ.

That is what I have said from day one and you continue to try to turn my words around and make them what you want them to be.

I said Christ is saying us through the Church by his True body and blood rather we see him in his physical body or not.

I said from day one that there is no difference between the Power that our Lord had rather he was here walking the earth or in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. It is still the same saving power that comes from God.

Jesus proclaimed that he was the anointed from the beginning of his ministry.

I have said and will repeat for the LAST TIME.

The liberation and Salvation brought by the Kingdom of GOD come to the human person in both his PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL DIMENSIONS. This is and always has been the teaching of the CC.

 

[guanophore]

Maybe you should go back and read my work first I know what I said, Rev said you have to have faith to be Baptised. I said that if you need to have faith to be Baptised then a Baby could not be baptised then. Thats what I said.

I read what you said also, and disagree with it. I think rev. kev is right, and faith is required for baptism. The only reason that infants are baptized in the Catholic Church is because their parents and godparents make a profession of faith on their behalf. We see this principle at work in the Scriptures where the friends bring the paralyzed man to Jesus, and lower him through the roof. The text states “Jesus saw THEIR faith” and healed the man. Also, Jesus heals the centurians servant based upon HIS faith. In fact, he says “I have not seen so great a faith in all of Israel”.

When one reads the baptismal rites for infants, it is clear that the parents make vows to raise the child in the faith. If these vows are not taken, the infant will not be baptized. So there is a profession of faith, and it is required for baptism.

However, I do agree with you that the profession is not expected from a person who cannot make one (like a disabled person or an infant), and I do agree with rev kev (who agrees with the Catholic Church) on the point that those who are of age are required to make their own profession of faith.

Now if you could show me where I said that a baby could not be baptised I will admit my mistake. But that is not what I said:shrug:

They are baptized on the profession of faith of those who are bringing them for baptism.
Baptism cannot be offered without a profession of faith.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I’m thinking about this topic and the Apostle Paul, in Ephesians talking about the Church Chaper One 15-22. Is the fulfillment of the Church of the Ephesians. So Paul is well of his route in conversion and creating a new ministry in Christs name and the Apostles teachings here at this point.

Yet nonetheless also in 1 Corinthians Paul addresses “the church of God that is in Corinth” 1 Corinthians 1:1. In fact, Paul typically opens his letters with greetings to the church he is referring to.

Paul first described the Church as the Body of Christ in 1 Corinthians 12.

Aslo, Christians form “one body in Christ” Romans 12:5

Expression is of the actual union of Christ, the head of the Church, with His body, that is, the members of the Church, and as it was then, it also is through history with the Catholic Church.

Anyway while we are at that point here of Mystical Body etc. I thought I’d add that:shrug:

 

[guanophore]

But like I said God’s Grace is amazing!! And God will never give you more then you can handle. But he never said it would be easy I guess.

Rinnie, thanks very much for this word of encouragement. I am experiencing some intense financial pressure right now, and I know I am being called to deepen my trust and faith in Him. I really needed this reminder.

God Bless you, sister!