Protestants don’t believe in a 1500 year gap, as this thread demonstrates. Not a one Protestant has even acknowledged they believe in such a gap.
I already belong to it, just not the Roman Catholic Church.A continuation is nice but why not belong to the Catholic Church?
This question assumes that there is such a gap. Before anyone has to answer this, you have to show the probability of the premises behind the question.
Maybe you can should allow Lek to speak for him or herself. Doesn’t Lek have just as much a right to an opinion as you guys? What are you afraid of? That Lek might disagree with you? He probably won’t, but we’ll just have to wait and see.
Just curious: Why not belong to the Catholic Church (head-quartered in Rome) established circa AD 33 - to which the following fallible leaders belonged: the apostles, Clement, bishop of Rome (1st century) Ignatius of Antioch and student of the apostles (1st-2nd century), Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (2rd century) Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (3rd century) and Augustine (5th century)? All of these leaders traversing the first 400 years of Christianity belonged to the same church, which is the present-day Catholic Church - not to be confused with the Catholic Church to which you belong since you claim to be an ex Catholic, belonging to the Lutheran Church (WELS).
The original church Jesus founded was his group of disciples, not Rome. When Jesus founded the church in Rome, it is very plausible that Jesus is the Rock and not Peter.
OK, let’s assume that the original church to which the apostles belonged, was not the Catholic Church; nor was it one of the Protestant churches. We know that the original church which the apostles belong to must still exist today - right? Leaving the Catholic Church, and all of the Protestant Churches out of the discussion, in view of the idea that the apostles belonged to neither, please identify the Church today to which the apostles belonged, in the 1st century i.e. the original church established by Jesus circa AD 33 in Jerusalem on Pentecost?
Why should I, or anyone one, trust your claim that the Catholic Church lost its way?
Because I don’t believe Ignatius, Augustine, Polycarp, or Clement were Roman Catholics in the modern sense. And I believe that the RC church teaches serious doctrinal error. And I was totally miserable as one. For those reasons and more I have no plans to return to the Roman Catholic Church at this time.Just curious: Why not belong to the Catholic Church (head-quartered in Rome) established circa AD 33 - to which the following fallible leaders belonged: the apostles, Clement, bishop of Rome (1st century) Ignatius of Antioch and student of the apostles (1st-2nd century), Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (2rd century) Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (3rd century) and Augustine (5th century)? All of these leaders traversing the first 400 years of Christianity belonged to the same church, which is the present-day Catholic Church - not to be confused with the Catholic Church to which you belong since you claim to be an ex Catholic, belonging to the Lutheran Church (WELS).
OK. I understand. Sorry that you felt so miserable as a Catholic.
All of those church leaders were “Roman” Catholics. For example, Augustine said: “Rome has spoken; the case is closed” from his Sermons 131:10.Are you suggesting that Ignatius of Antioch belonged to the 1st-century Catholic Church, but not the present-day Catholic Church: “Wherever the Bishop appears, there let the multitude of the people be; just as where Christ Jesus is, there is the catholic church”?
There weren’t thousands of denominations back then, so that question doesn’t make sense. Either way, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that they believed Christ was Lord and Savior.
Sex scandal? Crusades? Improper catechesis? Meddling into the politics of Europe? Conquest of the Americas? Oppression of the rights of gays and women? Oppressing the sexual and reproductive freedom of couples? Administering sacraments while neglecting community? Churches that don’t say hi to visitors? Parishoners that lack biblical knowledge? No focus on missions and evangelism?
Yes. The churches in which God is evidenced by the faith and works of their members. And yes.
Theoretically yes, but being a Christian and not going to church is unwise. Kinda like how marrying a nonbeliever is not wrong per se, but unwise.
Actually, may I add that the Bible says that the whole world knows of God through his creation, so even if there is no church around, that is not an excuse for people not to know God, and in turn, Christ.
(emphasis added)
The argument is that the Roman Church then was not what the Roman Church claims to be now.OK. I understand. Sorry that you felt so miserable as a Catholic.
Clement of Rome did not belong to the “Roman” CC?
If they did not belong to the church that I belong to, then which church in the world today, did they belong to, back then?
Could it be because people are leaving Christianity in droves in England and Australia, that the RCC’s proportion is up there?(emphasis added)
I’ve been in the RCC as an adult, since 1981. Back then, people were saying the the RCC was shrinking while the others were growing. Yet, here in Australia, the RCC has, as a proportion of all practicing Christians, only grown.
Similarly in England the numbers have only moved towards the RCC. I’m not sure about America, but I suspect it’s the case there also.
The basic reason is that converts to the Protestantism usually fall away - or some end up in the RCC (or return to it), whereas converts to the RCC usually stay.
The Protestants have made big gains in South America since then, but that will peak also, and eventually the pendulum will turn back - if history is any guide.
Still, I do accept that the RCC could be doing more to evangelise…
Thousand of denominations in the first century, along side the Catholic curch? For example…?
Jesus is the Catholic Church i.e. the Mystical Body, the Church of which He is the head and savior, as per the NT. I will not deny the Holy Eucharist, something saint Paul warned about: “So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.” If you want to, that’s cool.
Let’s say for the moment that you are right and the Evangelical churches are booming, while the Catholic Church is shrinking: is that reason enough to belong to one of the Evangelical churches? If so which one? Do they all represent the truths taught by Christ?Does that include the Catholic Church?
For example…?
Did God wait until the 16th century reformation to finally guide the protestant churches into all truth? Hmm…
