Early Church was more Catholic than Protestantism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mannyfit75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
guanophore;3367088]
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Are you saying people were praying the hail Mary in the 2nd - 3rd centuries?
guanophore
yes. It is just a scriptural prayer.
i know its claimed to be a scriptural prayer but did people in the
2nd-3rd centuries pary the hail Mary?
Let me answer my own question with this quote from the New Advent which says this about its origins–“In point of fact there is little or no trace of the Hail Mary as an accepted devotional formula before about 1050. All the evidence suggests that it took its rise from certain versicles and responsories occurring in the Little Office or Cursus of the Blessed Virgin which just at that time was coming into favour among the monastic orders.”
What this clearly shows is that the Hail Mary prayer was not a part of the early church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Secondly, the reciting of the Psallms is not the same as saying the rosary.
guanophore
That depends. The Psalms were Jesus’ prayer book. It was customary for observant Jews to pray the Psalms daily. Some Christians had them all memorized, and prayed 150 daily. They used a string of beads to keep track. When the prayers of devotion were introduced to some who had not memorized all the Psalms, they used different prayers on the beads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Third, the rosary did not come about for centuries.
This alone shows this was not a practice of the early church.
guanophore
Using a string of beads for prayers and meditation is a very ancient practice. Granted, the prayer beads were not called a Rosary until late middle ages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Lets take the Assumption of Mary. …
What this shows is that the early church did not believe in her assumption. This is another indicator that the early church was not Roman Catholic.
guanophore
Yes and no. The early church did believe in the assumption of Mary.
Here is what the New Advent says about her supposed assumption–“Regarding the day, year, and manner of Our Lady’s death, nothing certain is known. The earliest known literary reference to the Assumption is found in the Greek work De Obitu S. Dominae. Catholic faith, however, has always derived our knowledge of the mystery from Apostolic Tradition. Epiphanius (d. 403) acknowledged that he knew nothing definite about it (Haer., lxxix, 11). The dates assigned for it vary between three and fifteen years after Christ’s Ascension. Two cities claim to be the place of her departure: Jerusalem and Ephesus. Common consent favours Jerusalem, where her tomb is shown; but some argue in favour of Ephesus. The first six centuries did not know of the tomb of Mary at Jerusalem.”

I think even you would agree this was not a belief of the early church.
However, the Roman Rite was not separate the majority of the first millenia. For that reason, it cannot be said to be “Roman”.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
The early church did not believe many of the doctrines of the later Roman Catholic church. These few examples above show that.
guanophore
I think you have your devotionals and disciplines confused with doctrines.
I don’t think so. Devotions are an outworking of doctrines. When you look at the doctrines on Mary it logically follows that these devotions would follow from these doctrines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
The protestant churches i’m familar with don’t believe in these doctrines or practices so that would mean at least on these points protestants are more in line with the early church than the Roman Catholic church.
guanophore
Do you think that your personal experience is representative of Protestants around the world?
Yes. However there are a lot of distinctions among them that must be kept in mind.
 
Lots of good information here. There is even some info about Peter and Paul being in Rome. But I see nothing regarding St Peter being the first bishop of Rome.
Peter was Pope. He have authority anywhere he would have went. If there was another Bishop in Rome, and this is not likely according to Church history, but even if there was, Peter’s authority overrides. The fact is though, that Peter was in Rome, and he was the first Bishop, either in the sense of Chronological order or authority. Everyone agreed on this for a thousand years.
 
The earlly church was more Jewish than it was Roman.
I don’t know how far back you are going in early Church history, but yes, you are right. The members of the earliest Church, before Paul, were mostly Jewish. Jesus gave His teachings to His Jewish Apostles. Jesus was probably raised in the Jewish Faith. Jesus parents were Jewish. Jesus taught in Synagogues. It was not until the Church was established in Rome that use of Roman rites were begun. But all Christian churches have their roots and foundations in Judaism. Because Jesus was a Jew.👍
 
In St Peter’s time, there was no such terminology as “Pope of Rome”. Linus was the first bishop of Rome.
i know its claimed to be a scriptural prayer but did people in the
2nd-3rd centuries pary the hail Mary?
Let me answer my own question with this quote from the New Advent which says this about its origins–“In point of fact there is little or no trace of the Hail Mary as an accepted devotional formula before about 1050. All the evidence suggests that it took its rise from certain versicles and responsories occurring in the Little Office or Cursus of the Blessed Virgin which just at that time was coming into favour among the monastic orders.”
What this clearly shows is that the Hail Mary prayer was not a part of the early church.

Here is what the New Advent says about her supposed assumption–“Regarding the day, year, and manner of Our Lady’s death, nothing certain is known. The earliest known literary reference to the Assumption is found in the Greek work De Obitu S. Dominae. Catholic faith, however, has always derived our knowledge of the mystery from Apostolic Tradition. Epiphanius (d. 403) acknowledged that he knew nothing definite about it (Haer., lxxix, 11). The dates assigned for it vary between three and fifteen years after Christ’s Ascension. Two cities claim to be the place of her departure: Jerusalem and Ephesus. Common consent favours Jerusalem, where her tomb is shown; but some argue in favour of Ephesus. The first six centuries did not know of the tomb of Mary at Jerusalem.”

I think even you would agree this was not a belief of the early church.

Okay group. Found this on Catholic.com
catholic.com/library/rosary.asp
The word rosary comes from Latin and means a garland of roses, the rose being one of the flowers used to symbolize the Virgin Mary. If you were to ask what object is most emblematic of Catholics, people would probably say, “The rosary, of course.”
Eventually sometime around 800 AD, a practice started to develop among the laity of the church. Every day, a person who wanted to pray along with the entire church would get up before his work day began and collected 150 pebbles and put them inside a small pouch he kept on his belt. Every time he heard the bell at the local church ring to signify whatever prayer service during the day, the devoted laity would say the Lord’s Prayer for every psalm. After they said one they would pull out a pebble and toss it on the ground. When they got to the end of their pebbles, they knew they were finished. Soon this became so popular that instead of pebbles, the laity would get a large rope and tie 150 knots in it and use this to count their prayers, and eventually this was shorted even more to a rope with 50 knots they simply said 3 times each day. This shortened version originated within Celtic cultures.
As this devotion became more and more popular, the church decided to use it as well. Beginning around the 13th century, church theologians began to attribute specific psalms about the life of Christ. The theologians had always attributed the Old Testament being completely fulfilled and revealed in the New Testament of scripture. After all, the bible itself is an account of salvation history. They attributed each of the Psalms to be about the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. They then developed phrases of meditation and meaning to each of the Psalms. Around the same time, the church began to see how devotedly and special the Blessed Virgin Mary was to the prophesies within the Psalms. Mary was seen as the way the fulfillment of the prophesies of the Old Testament came about. After all the prophet Isaiah constantly said in his prophesies that Christ would be born of a virgin. Soon 150 meditations on the Blessed Virgin Mary’s life were developed as well as a further meditation in the way the Psalms were used as prayer, and when the 150 meditations of the Blessed Virgin Mary were used in prayer, the part of scripture when Mary visits Elizabeth was used (which is the first part of the prayer recited in the modern rosary): Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb,

It is at the time of the Albigensian heresy along St. Dominic’s journey that it is reported that the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to him. In her apparition, she told Dominic to teach people the meditations of Mary and of Christ, and if he did so, the heresy would be dispelled from France. This is exactly what occurred. What St. Dominic did was combine the prayers and the meditations of both “versions” of the “rosary.” Eventually after widespread teachings on the meditations of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, the heresy was ignored and the church regained its original piety. This was the first widespread teaching of the rosary, and is why St. Dominic is attributed with its success and creation.

And that’s all I’ve got to say. Right now, of course.🙂

I don’t think so. Devotions are an outworking of doctrines. When you look at the doctrines on Mary it logically follows that these devotions would follow from these doctrines.

Yes. However there are a lot of distinctions among them that must be kept in mind.
 
I don’t know how far back you are going in early Church history, but yes, you are right. The members of the earliest Church, before Paul, were mostly Jewish. Jesus gave His teachings to His Jewish Apostles. Jesus was probably raised in the Jewish Faith. Jesus parents were Jewish. Jesus taught in Synagogues. It was not until the Church was established in Rome that use of Roman rites were begun. But all Christian churches have their roots and foundations in Judaism. Because Jesus was a Jew.👍
My point exactly. It is why this thread is useless.
 
Early church member writings to not show catholic or protestant things. Just Jewish and Christian behavior. The early church was not run like one world religion with a hierarchiy called a magesterium, they did not pray to Mary or saints, they did not attibute titles to Mary, they did not have a mass sacrifice cermony. No writings show this.

around 400, you start seeing the emergence of some trends that lead to the catholic church, triggered by Constantine’s conversion. But even in John and Paul’s time, there were false Gospels.

Jesus did not ever use the word Catholic or Protestant. On the day of Pentecost, the apostles and others did not start a Catholic Church. There are so many things done by the catholic church today that was not done there.

For example, today, for an adult non-catholic to be baptised in the catholic church. I have go through about 1 year training. Peter instanly baptised many people on Pentecost. These perople “were cut to the heart.” There are other examples of people being instantly baptized in Acts upon their conversion. Yet an adult outside the catholic church cannot do this.

There are tons of things done by the catholic church today that can be proven were not done by early church members.

Studying the Bible, historical context, and history help me see historical truths, but when I Repented from my sins and put my trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, then the Holy Spirit confirmed it.

The Bible is the only Writing that is “Inspired” by God, and therefore cannot be wrong. Prophecy confirms it. Christ fulfilled hundred of Jewish Prophesies. The re-emergence of Israel fulfills amazing prophesies.

Since all historical writings are taken by faith since non of us are there, better to put your faith in a writing that has “proven itself” through accurate prophecy. better to put the most faith in the only Book that is Inspired by God.

If early church writing in the second century are considered inspired, why were they not put in the Bible??
“rbarcia” says it like it is thank you very much for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
 
History has shows through the writings of the ECF proven to be more Catholic, or Orthodox than Protestantism.

Why are Protestant’s beliefs and doctrines are different from the teachings of the ECF who were taught by the Apostles. When comes to history Protestantism fails.

Cardinal Newman said this. “to be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant.”

To be historically Christian is to be Catholics. Protestants appears to be modern and are more distant to the historical church.

Are Ex-Protestants who converted to Catholic or Orthodox change their faith due to study of Christian history?
wow, i didn’t realize that catholics were brought out of egypt and brought to the promised land. man, thats amazing! or you know what? maybe adam was a catholic. and we can say eve must of been protestant. thats a good one too…
 
wow, i didn’t realize that catholics were brought out of egypt and brought to the promised land. man, thats amazing! or you know what? maybe adam was a catholic. and we can say eve must of been protestant. thats a good one too…
Adam and Eve Were Catholic. They attended “Holier than thou Catholic Church”.Adam was the Grand Knight for the Knights of Columbus Council #1975
 
Adam and Eve Were Catholic. They attended “Holier than thou Catholic Church”.Adam was the Grand Knight for the Knights of Columbus Council #1975
thats pretty good, thanks for the smile. i would like to sit around and talk awhile but i gotta get ready for work. maybe tonight.
 
“rbarcia” says it like it is thank you very much for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
Hello. I don’t mean to put your belief in the Bible down, but it will sound thus. My question is, what has been prophesied in the Bible that cannot be explained by PERSONAL interpretation? I think this is where the Catholic Church and most Protestant churches differ. The Catholic Church began, as you say, around 300 to 400 CE, under the authority of the emperors to unify. The whole problem, I think is difference of opinion as to whether there can be this PERSONAL interpretation, inspiration by the Holy Spirit, or must definitions, beliefs be guided by a church/Pope inspired and supported by the Holy Spirit.
 
How are you Catholic?

The Catholic Church was founded by Christ. The Roman emperors called the debating sects within the Church to the council of Trent to address the heresies of the day amoung them being Arianism.
 
because they don’t have nothing to say, so the easy way out is be sarcastic.
oh we have alot to say, but life is to short not to laugh once in awhile. how about you, whens the last time you broke the ice by being silly? do you remember that show the flying nun? that was so cool…
 
My question is, what has been prophesied in the Bible that cannot be explained by PERSONAL interpretation? I think this is where the Catholic Church and most Protestant churches differ. The Catholic Church began, as you say, around 300 to 400 CE, under the authority of the emperors to unify. The whole problem, I think is difference of opinion as to whether there can be this PERSONAL interpretation, inspiration by the Holy Spirit, or must definitions, beliefs be guided by a church/Pope inspired and supported by the Holy Spirit.
Boy, when you’re wrong you are wrong!

Take out your telephone book and flip to the “churches” section of the yellow pages. How many differing churches do you see in your own town? How many more in your state? The country? The world? These bickering Protestant faiths have ONE thing in common – personal interpretation. Each person thinks that they’ve interpreted it right.

Your theory that the Catholic Church was founded between 300 and 400 is laughable. St. Ignatius, third bishop of Carthage and student of John the Apostle proves your theory wrong. He stated in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans that:

“See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper 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; even as, **wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. **”

Seeing that Ignatius died somewhere between 107 and 110 AD, I’d say that the Catholic Church had been around LONG before 400 AD.

Christ founded the Catholic Church, not Constantine. 😉
 
How are you Catholic?

The Catholic Church was founded by Christ. The Roman emperors called the debating sects within the Church to the council of Trent to address the heresies of the day amoung them being Arianism.
Not the Council of Trent, the Council of Nicea. 😉 Nicea was called to combat heresies such as Arianism, Gnosticism, and such. The Nicene Creed was written by this council to affirm what the church taught about Christ and His divinity.
 
Boy, when you’re wrong you are wrong!

Take out your telephone book and flip to the “churches” section of the yellow pages. How many differing churches do you see in your own town? How many more in your state? The country? The world? These bickering Protestant faiths have ONE thing in common – personal interpretation. Each person thinks that they’ve interpreted it right.

Your theory that the Catholic Church was founded between 300 and 400 is laughable. St. Ignatius, third bishop of Carthage and student of John the Apostle proves your theory wrong. He stated in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans that:

“See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper 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; even as, **wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. **”

Seeing that Ignatius died somewhere between 107 and 110 AD, I’d say that the Catholic Church had been around LONG before 400 AD.

Christ founded the Catholic Church, not Constantine. 😉
I probably misquoted myself. What I meant to say is that the church under the jurisdiction of the Emperors, first with the emperor Constantine, then with emperor Theodosios “organized” the church into a cohesive group with the help of the Bishops of the Western Church for political reasons and perhaps for “some” theological reasons. He felt by coalesing the doctrines of the Church, the empire could be consolidated . The Christians were the largest religious communities throughout the world at that time. The Bishop of Rome ,along with the other Bishops of the Western hemisphere,at the Council of Nicea , organized it because of a religious heresy which had brewed for many years between the Eastern Churches, particulary the Greek Orthodox Church with the church in Rome. Constantine was “possibly” a great arbitrator between the Bishops of the East and West, but did not declare doctrines of the Church. What is now known as the Roman Catholic Church existed as a community of Bishops throughout the known world from the time of Christ, so pardon me for the error which I wrote, but this post is the truth as I know it. Please note, the subject of “political reasons” is Constantine, not the Bishops. Sorry for the confusion. 🙂 Peace
 
Again, I disagree. Until the Edict of Milan in 313, Christianity was an illegal religion. The faith was already organized, as the writings of the early bishops show. The legalization of Christianity gave the church the ability to become more visual to the world (ie, churches, open evangelization, open condemnation of heretical thought, etc.), but it did not “organize it.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top