How did the Catholic church start?

[HalfAngel_18]

Planter,
I don’t know about anyone else but I have found your post to be extremely confusing. It sounds like on one hand you are defending the Church on the other hand trying to deny the Church. Pentecost is called the birthday of the Church as that is when the Church officially came into being.

As far as Constantine, he was 4th century. His Edict of Milan was issued in 313 A.D. This was when Constantine made it safe to be a Christian.

umm…is the Catholic church and the Pentecostal church claiming to have started at the same time over the same event? I’m getting really confused…

 

[Gamera]

Yes, I’ve seen that get confused before…the whole thing with the priests and confession still off-sets me though. They ‘represent’ Jesus I was told?

Yes. The way fundamentalists phrase it is usually, “Men can’t forgive sins, only Jesus can forgive sins.” But priests exercise only that authority given to them by Jesus (“If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained,” John 20:23). Priests don’t have any independent authority — all their authority comes from Jesus. They merely administer the duties given by Jesus to His priests.

Similarly, fundamentalists ask, “Why do you confess to a priest instead of confessing to Jesus?” We don’t. We confess to Jesus through a priest.

 

[HalfAngel_18]

The article first posted was from a baptist site. Then the discussion headed to Pentecostals. The baptist don’t believe that the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit (ie tongues, miracles) still exist, that they ceases with the death of the last apostle or with the writing of the New Testament, while the Pentecostals mentioned seemed to think they are the true church because they have the charismatic gifts which were manifest on Pentecost.

So I am confused on where this thread his heading to.

His Pentecostal friends are trying to argue that they are the true church.
The baptist in the article is trying to argue that the Baptist church is the true church (click on his home page and look at all the different articles provided), yet they disagree very strongly on major beliefs.

The Pentecostal try to claim they are the early church because of “Pentecost” is in their name, while I have seen baptist argue that they are the true church because of John the baptist had “baptist” in his name.

If one is looking to the original true church, wouldn’t you look for a continuous line of succession of it’s leaders?
Popes
Peter’s Successors

Wouldn’t you see a development of doctrine that seems to have continuity?
(An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine
John Henry Newman)

For the first 300 to 400 years of Protestantism, the Protestants claimed that the charismatic gifts disappeared from the time of the apostles. Since they were only found in the Catholic church, they ignored them, but it wasn’t until they began to appear again in protestant churches in the 1800’s and 1900’s that some began to admit that they were still around, and then the fundamentalists began to quote scripture out of context to show that they have ceased. (ie tounges will cease when the perfect is come - with the “perfect” referring to the new testament)
They have always been around in the history of the church, not in the abundant tongue speaking pentecostal churches we see today, but were found occasionally through out the ages.

As for the article I would recommend the book by Karl Keating:
catholicism and fundamentalism

For your pentecostal friends claiming they are the true original church this wikipedia article might help you with the basics.
Pentecostalism

It seems to me that all the other churches which try to claim they are the true original church have a small problem:
They either have a huge gap where they claim the church disappeared, or they have to lay claim to many heretical groups as their lineage.

As for me, I will stick with the proven list of the Bishops of Rome (Apostolic succession), and the development of doctrine which can be proven through the writings of the church fathers and my support of the Catholic church being the original true church.

Yes…I didn’t know which faith that article was from, but my pentecostal friend was the one who told me about Constantine starting the Catholic faith, so I looked it up and found that along with the other stuff in it. So that’s how the conversations are Baptist and Pentecostal I guess.

It’s interesting what you said about the charismatic gifts, I’ll be doing some research on that soon.
Yeah, I’m going to take a look at that book you put on here.
Thanks.

 

[Sabda]

umm…is the Catholic church and the Pentecostal church claiming to have started at the same time over the same event? I’m getting really confused…

You solve that problem by studying the beliefs of the early Church. I’m sure I listed them above but if not here are two really good sites that well give you the writings of the early Church Fathers. This one is Protestant and this one is Catholic.

 

[guanophore]

The Catholic Church had to get their information from some where! For the Roman Empire did not exist in the time of Noah, Moses etc. The Catholic Church information had to come from the Hebrews, the Israelites is where they got the OT. Jesus was reading the OT of Moses, Isaiah etc in the Temple. The Catholic Church did not exist at that time! That is why the Romans were presecuting those who believed in God and in Jesus Christ. Herod was the ruler but the Romans ruled over them.

Remember the Roman Empire destroyed the Temple in Jerusaleam, could this be when they got the scriptures.

No, planter. The only interest the Roman empire had in the Sacred Writings was to burn them. But prior to the destruction of the temple, faithful Jews fled with the scrolls to protect them.

The bible like you said did not fall from the sky. The Catholic Church would not have the history needed and all that was written in the OT. The Hebrews would have the OT Holy Scriptures that Jesus read aloud in the temple. Even the Holy Prophets writtings.

Have you forgotten that all the first Catholics were faithful Jews?

The Catholic Church was not yet formed. I do not know in what century when Constandine came about, so he had to get the NT gospels from the apostles. They were presecuted by the Roman Empire. Constandine had to get the gospel writtings and knowledge of from somewhere right or by the Churches that already existed that were hidden under ground.

Constantine had nothing to do with the formation of the Catholic Church. If you read the post above yours, you can see a passage from St. Ignatius to the Smyrneas that was written two centuries before Contantine, that mentions the Catholic Church. I don’t know where you got this misleading history.

That is why in the book of Revelation it mentions only the 7 Churches that existed. Could that be why the Catholic Church is not mentioned because it did not exist at that time yet.It had not been exstablished yet when John was in prision on the island of Patmos, the island was a prison island used by the Roman Empire.

No, planter, there were many more churches than only the 7 mentioned in Revelation. That message was for those particular churches, it does not mean others did not exist. Where are you GETTING this crazy stuff?!

No it began before you even came to be in God’s great plan of salvation with Adam and Eve there fall!
God Created you and me and the Blessed Virigin Mary! Don’t you think so? remember God choose Mary like he did with Adam Moses Noe etc. He has also choosen created ( wisdom,mind, thought) before they even existed on earth.

God Bless

I agree that God’s plan to have fellowship with man began at Creation. Man turned from God, so he hatched a back up plan, and we see this in the Protoevangelion. God tried to reach the world through the nation of Israel, and they rebelled. At each attempt, God had prepared beforehand from the foundation of the world.

However, I don’t think the Church was born until after Christ. I have heard that the Church was born from the water and blood that flowed from the side of Christ on the cross. But certainly, at Pentecost the power came in, and it has all been uphill since then!

 

[guanophore]

I am asking because of my ignorance but when John wrote the book of revelation ( meaning unveiling) inspired by God and delivered by Jesus in a vision to John, who fainted when he saw Jesus,

John did not faint, but was slain in the Spirit. This is much different than fainting. When one faints, one has lost consciousness. When one swoons in the Spirit, the body cannot withstand the power of the Spirit, but the mind is awake, and more aware to the supernatural.

because he was old and had not seen Jesus in 65 years. John wrote of the 7 churches. The 7 churches were named after the nations, that they were in right?

Yes, John was old, but one should not assume that he did not see Jesus. John was a mystic, and he may have seen the Lord many times. In this case he was instructed to write it down. Please explain how you see that the churches were in 7 nations?

So why does the Catholic Church which I belong to make it more important to be known or called a Catholic rather than me becoming a child of God.

There is no distinction between the two. Everyone who is a child of God is a Catholic.

Jesus gave no church titles or names he preached only of God.

YOu can only say this if you reject the majority of the New Testament, where the Spirit led the writers to give many titles and roles.

Jesus did not come to start “all these different religions or one religion” but to teach us, safe us for eternal salvation. This was not Jesus message at all. In what “building” we gather is not important, but rather that “we gather together” as “one” believing in and praising God—right?

I agree that division is not Jesus’ plan. In fact, He founded ONE CHURCH, and only has ONE BODY. You are right, what building we gather is not important, but to gather as One, we must all hold to the same Apostolic Truth. The fact that not all do is what causes divisions.

God is the authority over all right, we choose to worship God where we choose to worship God in what ever Church we believe, those who truly believe what we believe in right. No can hold you under bondage any more or stop you from serving God. Will we not all be judge individually, including every church who preaches the word and truth of God.

The problem with this is that every church that has departed from the Apostolic Teaching has rejected some part of the the Truth that Jesus taught, some more than others.

So when the Catholic Church started, or if it is the only true Church is not important for our salvation, but that they and we are serving God and doing all that is pleasing to him, right?

I must disagree with you here, beloved brother. I think it matters that we cling to the Church that Jesus started, and the Church that He build upon the foundation of His Apostles.

The first reference in the Early Church Fathers to the “Catholic” Church was by Ignatius around 90 AD, if I’m not mistaken. That would have been about sixty years after Christ’s resurrection. Not long.

This is true, but it is taken from the original Teachings of the Apostles. They transmitted faithfully Jesus’ instruction that the gospel was to be preached “throughout the whole” (kath-holos)

“proclaiming throughout the whole” Luke 8:39

Col 1:5-7
Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel 6 which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing - so among yourselves, from the day you heard and understood the grace of God in truth, 7 as you learned …

kathos holos. the whole world = throughout the whole

The Reformation shattered Christendom’s unity, however, doing irrepairable damage. There is no way that Protestants can now say, “we all agree and there are no divisions among us, but we are now complete in the same mind and in the same judgment.”

I agree that Christendom’s unity was shattered by rebellion, but respectfully, I must disagree also. There is no damage that Christ is not able to repair! an they were in the days of the Reformation. The Reformers would have burned at the stake the conservative Christians of today who laud the Reformers as their forebears.

Christ walked the earth all who believed were Catholics. would we be also right in saying Moses wasn’t Moses he was our Catholic Pope then also?

God Bless

God intended for Israel to be a Light to the Nations. Unfortunately, they did not embrace God’s plan, and God had to graft in a wild olive branch. The Mosaic covenant was valid for those to whom it was given. The New Covenant in the Blood of Christ is valid for those to whom it is given.

 

[guanophore]

You are right and thank you for the correction. I am not trying to deny the Church sorry if it comes across that way. Pentecost is called the birthday of the Church. Please explain to you mean the Catholic church today. But the Catholic Church did not come into being till when?

But there was already hundreds of churches in Turkey who believed in God and Jesus Christ, were they not before the Catholic Church came into existence.

Thanks God Bless

No, but this is a very good question. You can read about the evangelization of Turkey in the book of Acts. Peter when there, as well as Paul. It was in Antioch that the followers of Jesus were first called “Christians”. Indeed, aside from Jerusalem, the can claim the oldest Apostolic succession in the world.

Please explain to me why Pentecost is called the birthday of the Catholic Church. Did not the Catholic Church build its faith on the early Churches of Christ. “Not the other way around”.

No, but I am curious to know how you think the “early Churches of Christ” started?

Do you not see Pentecost as the birth of these?

For the Catholic Church was nuot the first church to believe in God and in Jesus Christ. Like all the hundreds of under ground cities with built catherdals in Turkey. The Catholic Church did not even exist then.

I think, when you read the book of Acts about the birth of the Church, it is clear that the Apostles were active in Antioch, and it is plain that this is where the Church was planted and grew from Peter and Paul. Where do you think these Churches came from, if not the Apostles?

Do I sound crazy, I know I am confused.

Yes. But it is ok. You have come to the right place.

 

[anthony022071]

Please explain to me why Pentecost is called the birthday of the Catholic Church.

As Pope Benedict says,the Church was catholic and missionary from its beginning. At Pentecost,people from many different nations who spoke many different laguages heard the gospel that the apostles preached and were converted on that day.

Did not the Catholic Church build its faith on the early Churches of Christ. “Not the other way around”.

For the Catholic Church was not the first church to believe in God and in Jesus Christ. Like all the hundreds of under ground cities with built catherdals in Turkey.

The Catholic Church was underground,illegal and persecuted until the Edict of Toleration was passed in 311.

The Catholic Church did not even exist then.

Yes,it did. The first reference to the Catholic Church is in a letter of Ignatius,written around the year 110. And in the 90’s,Clement the bishop of Rome wrote a letter to the Corinthians which shows that he had ecclesiastical jurisdiction over them. Catholic means “whole” or “universal”. The only other churches were those of heretics who preached a false gospel,like the Gnostics. The true Christians never gave themselves the title “Christian Church”. The Church was always called “Catholic”.

“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 the appointment 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 also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2 (c. A.D. 110).

“All the people wondered that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna. For every word that went out of his mouth either has been or shall yet be accomplished.” Martyrdom of Polycarp, 16:2 (A.D. 155).

“…to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of ecclesiastical discipline…one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul’s name to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted by the Catholic Church…But of Arsinous, called also Valentinus, or of Militiades we receive nothing at all.” The fragment of Muratori (A.D. 177).

“Nor does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:10,3 (A.D. 180).

“Concerning this Holy Catholic Church Paul writes to Timothy, ‘That thou mayest know haw thou oughtest to behave thyself in the House of God, which is the Church of the Living God, the pillar and ground of the truth’” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures,18:25(A.D. 350).

"The Article, In one Holy Catholic Church,’ on which, though one might say many things, we will speak but briefly. It is called Catholic then because it extends over all the world, from one end of the earth to the other; and because it teaches universally and completely one and all the doctrines which ought to come to men’s knowledge, concerning things both visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly… for this cause the Faith has securely delivered to thee now the Article, And in one Holy Catholic Church;’ that thou mayest avoid their wretched meetings, and ever abide with the Holy Church Catholic in which thou wast regenerated. And if ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord’s House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens houses of the Lord), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of 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, Catechetical Lectures, 18:23,26 (A.D. 350).

 

[HalfAngel_18]

.

Paul said that no one had the right to deviate from the gospel he had given believers (1 Timothy 1:8-11). And in Galations 1:8-9, he says, “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!”

.

Could you elaborate on 1 Timothy 1:8-11?

“We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law, with the righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the uholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, sodomites, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching, acoording to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”

I don’t see how this says that no one has the right to deviate from the gospel. Could you explain please?

 

[guanophore]

Paul said that no one had the right to deviate from the gospel he had given believers (1 Timothy 1:8-11). And in Galations 1:8-9, he says, “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!”

Could you elaborate on 1 Timothy 1:8-11?

I don’t see how this says that no one has the right to deviate from the gospel. Could you explain please?

I agree. It is clear that there were people deviating, or Paul would not have written this warning. What he is saying is that, if one does deviate, they will be accursed, not that they can’t do it.

 

[graceandglory]

The Catholic Church started when a small group prayed in an upper room, with Peter, and the Holy Spirit came upon them and guided them. We call the event Pentecost.

The First Church Council was held in Jerusalem in Acts 15.

 

[MikeSar]

It comes from a confused person who ignores the Bible, the basic facts of history, and all the writings of the Early Church Fathers.

Why would they write it? Either true ignorance based on reading other similarly flawed materials or deliberate malice. Don’t know which.

Without the Founding Fathers of the church (or nation) there would be no church (or nation) as we know it. A possibly incomplete list:

1. St. Ignatius Antioch in Syria 140 - 203
2. St. Irenaeus Marseilles in Gaul 150 - 215
3. St. Clement Alexandria in Egypt 155 - 245
4. Tertullian Carthage, North Africa 200- 250?
5. Firmilian Caesarea in Palestine 4th cent.
6. Ambrosiaster Italy? 315 - 403
7. Epiphanes Cyprus 344 - 407
8. St. John Chrystostom Constantinople, Asia Minor 347 - 419
9. St. Jerome Palestine 354 - 430
10. St. Augustine Hippo, North Africa 354-430
11. Pseudo-Augustine ? 560 - 636
12. St. Isidore Seville, Spain
13. St. Bernard of Clairvaux 1090-1153 “The Last Founding Father”

 

[Lief_Erikson]

"HalfAngel:

I don’t see how this says that no one has the right to deviate from the gospel. Could you explain please?

I agree. It is clear that there were people deviating, or Paul would not have written this warning. What he is saying is that, if one does deviate, they will be accursed, not that they can’t do it.

I was very new to the faith at the time I wrote those things about law. I’ve only relatively recently learned that the Church can never officially teach error, and the teachings on religious freedom are official teachings, hence, they cannot be untrue. So because I believe in the Catholic Church, I agree with you. Also, I’ve learned more about the backing for religious freedom than I used to understand, and this knowledge has knocked out some of my misunderstandings. I’m still in the process of discerning this more fully so that I can get all the right information.

guanophore:

I agree that Christendom’s unity was shattered by rebellion, but respectfully, I must disagree also. There is no damage that Christ is not able to repair! an they were in the days of the Reformation. The Reformers would have burned at the stake the conservative Christians of today who laud the Reformers as their forebears.

I fully agree with you.