Early Church Father's supporting the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Poof
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the split was most apparent beginning at the Protestant reformation…that carries to this day this image of the Catholic Church being this great big, proud, corrupt, anti-Christian entity that makes grandiose claims about itself.

But prior to these times, there was only one faith encircled by small heretical groups. It is only in the past 500 years that we have had such a fractured and fragmented Christianity, devoid of the universal unity we find represented in having the Holy Father.

So going back to ancient times, the Church was as a seed that developed through continual and constant forms of documentation, and always discerning its movements conform to Christ.

People do not understand the nature and mission of the Church, that through our baptism we are all made one with Christ, our destiny communion with Christ – and with each other that is completed in heaven. There are these constant images of Church men and their habits, pictured as irrelevant to authentic spiritual needs of their subjects, spouting off doctrines and dogmas that have no bearing to their daily, as well as preventing the Word of God from nourishing and directing its believers.

So it is very important we pray not only for vocations, and this new evangelization that is emerging, but also for the restoration of sacred unity based on the Truth of Jesus Christ.
 
I_Thirst said:
Mentioning the Didache and St Ignatius of Antioch makes me wonder if all the Early Fathers were Roman Catholic. I know that they were Catholic, but they were in the East, right? That would make them part of the Eastern Catholic Church, all of which are in communion with Rome.

St Ignatius of Antioch was the Patriach of Antioch, and Antioch was one of the four Eastern Catholic Churches: Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Alexandria. The fifth Catholic Church (in no order btw) is the only western one, Rome.

Can someone offer correction or clarification of this for me?
Click to expand...
It might be worth noting as well that the term “Roman Catholic” wasn’t in existence until the Reformation when it was applied to Catholics by Protestants who also wanted to make some claim at catholicity. Because of this, it doesn’t seem to make chronological sense to attempt to apply this term to the early Church. Hope this isn’t too basic to be useful! God bless.
 
ChrisB103 said:
It might be worth noting as well that the term “Roman Catholic” wasn’t in existence until the Reformation when it was applied to Catholics by Protestants who also wanted to make some claim at catholicity. Because of this, it doesn’t seem to make chronological sense to attempt to apply this term to the early Church. Hope this isn’t too basic to be useful! God bless.
Click to expand...
That’s a really good point, Chris.
 
Poof said:
I’ve heard a lot of people say, especially from this forum, that the Early Church Father’s were clearly Roman Catholic as their writings and such were parallel with Church doctrine. Does anyone know a site where I can read some of their writings/quotes? Or if someone could post them here that would be really cool. One more thing, what is the Didache and how does it come in in this question?

In case anyone’s wondering, I’m not doubting this claim, in fact, I have read quite a number of quotes myself from CAF but I know I’m only scratching the tip of the Iceberg. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Try here newadvent.org/fathers/
 
KathleenGee said:
I think the split was most apparent beginning at the Protestant reformation…that carries to this day this image of the Catholic Church being this great big, proud, corrupt, anti-Christian entity that makes grandiose claims about itself.
Click to expand...
I have pondered this in the past…Sin usually begats more sin. If two groups separate and one keeps having fracturing which would you think would be wrong. Thank God in the midst of it the Holy Spirit keeps drawing people to chose to follow Christ. All in Christ have the same common thread of the sealing of the Holy Spirit. To be honest my wife and I have been walking with the Lord for about forty years…We do our best to to live close to the Lord and keep our lamps trimmed and full looking for His return. If I had the Holy Spirit calling me to join either the catholic or orthodox church, I would choose orthodox as it operates closer to what I read in the scriptures. God bless each one as we desire to draw closer to our Lord. marantha
 
SmallCcatholic said:
I have pondered this in the past…Sin usually begats more sin. If two groups separate and one keeps having fracturing which would you think would be wrong. Thank God in the midst of it the Holy Spirit keeps drawing people to chose to follow Christ. All in Christ have the same common thread of the sealing of the Holy Spirit. To be honest my wife and I have been walking with the Lord for about forty years…We do our best to to live close to the Lord and keep our lamps trimmed and full looking for His return. If I had the Holy Spirit calling me to join either the catholic or orthodox church, I would choose orthodox as it operates closer to what I read in the scriptures. God bless each one as we desire to draw closer to our Lord. marantha
Click to expand...
Very interesting and nice response. Quick question? Why do you say the Orthodox church operates closer to the scriptures?
 
jwinch2 said:
I think stating that the Early Fathers are “Roman” Catholic in their thinking is misleading at best. I would suggest it is a more accurate statement to say that they are Catholic (sans modifier) in their thinking. Peace,
Click to expand...
Amen.I’ve had many telling me all the roman catholic roots to every thing and I ask
if any other sees were involved…The modifier catholic only showed up a century after
the beginning of the church…They were squabbling about who they followed even in the beginning…
 
SmallCcatholic said:
Amen.I’ve had many telling me all the roman catholic roots to every thing and I ask
if any other sees were involved…The modifier catholic only showed up a century after
the beginning of the church…They were squabbling about who they followed even in the beginning…
Click to expand...
I am not sure that you are, but just in case, please don’t read too much into my statement.

Recognizing that there are multiple rites within the Catholic Church does not prevent me from completely believing that the Catholic Church is the one true Church established by Christ and carried forward by his apostles. I believe this absolutely. I happen to practice in the Latin Rite but that does not mean that someone is a Ukrainian, Greek, Melkite, etc. Catholic is any less Catholic than myself. Just like someone who has come in through the Anglican Pastoral Provision is no less Catholic than I am, or someone who celebrates the Ambrosian Rite, etc. My statement was meant to reflect that different Church Fathers may have influenced different parts of the Church in different ways, and to different extents.

Again, I am not entirely sure what you were getting at, but I don’t want to cause any misunderstandings…

Peace,
 
jwinch2 said:
I am not sure that you are, but just in case, please don’t read too much into my statement.
Again, I am not entirely sure what you were getting at, but I don’t want to cause any misunderstandings…
Peace,
Click to expand...
I just agree that it is misleading.(per original comment). But yes, I may be seeing in your
“misleading” comment than you intend…God bless. I just think many “discount” the roll of the rest of the “sees” involved…The just “see” (pun intended), Rome and those aligned with her as getting all the credit for the early church actions…
 
SmallCcatholic,

Protestants, especially those of the fundamentalist approach, look at Scriptures differently than we do.

First, we base ours on the Oral Tradition of Christ given us by the Apostles, and their successors…Peter holds the keys to the living tradition of Jesus Christ. The Roman and Orthodox Churches were founded by the Apostles. Any other interpretation that is not apostolic, we do not follow.

The other is that we look at Scripture in context to its whole, every part connected to the other. Fundamentalists particularly look at Scripture fragmented from the universal Church. And likewise, the Church began as a seed in Pentecost, but nevertheless, it is a living being that evolves and grows.

The other is that you have to also include the discipline of anthropology, and the integration of the faith into all the various regions and cultures. The arguing and bickering you saw was the universal work at church in insuring that the faith being passed on to new cultures into different languages and customs, that the creed, liturgy, and forms of administration.

I worked with Italian Catholic missionaries, considered among the best in the world, in the African missions, and my pastor was writing a language book, the first one, for our people. He spent much time understanding their culture and thought, and translating the local rites and incorporating them into Catholic, that of course, involved the bishop. There is always the problem with the veil of language. We may use the same language but mean different things. That is a great hurdle to overcome, especially when you are dealing not with just another person, but a culture of people with their own history.

Which brings us to the next part, the issue of what is the mission and nature of the Church. And there has always been much debate among Church administrators going back to the Apostles with their bickering and questioning among each other with Christ.

The Church is animated and led by the Holy Spirit, but it is working with human beings. It is Christ Himself Who gives the Church presence and power. And our separated brethren can only add their gifts to the Church…

So what may look to you is this person over here in this region is saying this, and then that person over there is saying that, and these over here are saying another…they are operating in the Church and in communion…hard to see that…but we do not look to individual ECF’s in themselves, but how they contributed to the whole of the deposit of faith in illuminating the life of Christ, as well as Christianity’s initial developments in the history of salvation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top