Impossible to find the true church

[excaliber]

It is impossible to be sure!!!
It is obviously between Catholic and Orthodox. These are the only two that Jesus could have started.

I have seen Orthodox and Catholics go back and forth…with out coming to any conclusion.

The bible is not a tie breaker. Because the scripture that Catholics use to say that Jesus was building his church on peter, has the Apostles fussing about who is greater later in the chapter.

The binding and losing was also referred to in scripture to the Apostles, not just peter.

Tradition obviously dosent solve it, because both should have the same tradition from the apostles.

Both have Aparations of Mary, Catholics at fatima, and Orthodox in egypt where Joseph and Mary lived while hiding from herod.

Both have miracles, Holy fire…and getting Jesus wounds in peoples hands and feet.

This is just plain ridiculous!!!

eather the latin church went into error. OR…EVERY OTHER SINGLE
SEA BUT THE LATIN CHURCH went into error.

And yet I hear that Jesus Christ is present in BOTH CHURCHES!!!
WHAT IN THE DICKENS!!!

The Orthodox say that it was the Coruption in the latin church (as a result of the Pope) that started the whole reformation!!!

A good tree canot produce rotten fruit. The reformation was rotten.

Some say the crusades was rotten.

It is hard to stand with the latin church, and thus stand against ALL the other seas. It is hard to stand with the Orthodox, and thus stand against the POPE.

as I said IMPOSSIBLE!!!
Satan gets another checkmate, and I hate it…But nothing can be done.

 

[mattkubes]

The one that Jesus picked! The verse in my signature shows Jesus saying (in the plural) that Satan wanted to have at all of the Apostles…but then He went on to note that He prayed (in the singular sense) for Peter, that his faith would be true.

I’ll let other people more qualified than me help you out though - as far as I can tell, you aren’t the first to ask these questions, and so there are answers to them!

 

[VARC]

It is impossible to be sure!!!
It is obviously between Catholic and Orthodox. These are the only two that Jesus could have started.

I have seen Orthodox and Catholics go back and forth…with out coming to any conclusion.

The bible is not a tie breaker. Because the scripture that Catholics use to say that Jesus was building his church on peter, has the Apostles fussing about who is greater later in the chapter.

The binding and losing was also referred to in scripture to the Apostles, not just peter.

Tradition obviously dosent solve it, because both should have the same tradition from the apostles.

Both have Aparations of Mary, Catholics at fatima, and Orthodox in egypt where Joseph and Mary lived while hiding from herod.

Both have miracles, Holy fire…and getting Jesus wounds in peoples hands and feet.

This is just plain ridiculous!!!

eather the latin church went into error. OR…EVERY OTHER SINGLE
SEA BUT THE LATIN CHURCH went into error.

And yet I hear that Jesus Christ is present in BOTH CHURCHES!!!
WHAT IN THE DICKENS!!!

The Orthodox say that it was the Coruption in the latin church (as a result of the Pope) that started the whole reformation!!!

A good tree canot produce rotten fruit. The reformation was rotten.

Some say the crusades was rotten.

It is hard to stand with the latin church, and thus stand against ALL the other seas. It is hard to stand with the Orthodox, and thus stand against the POPE.

as I said IMPOSSIBLE!!!
Satan gets another checkmate, and I hate it…But nothing can be done.

Satan gets a checkmate? Don’t you think you’re being a tad melodramtic? I know what you’re saying. I can’t say with a straight face that Rome or the Eastern churches are not in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. And at the same time I cannot explain how the Church is one and is not in sacramental communion. I will put my trust in the Lord and worship in the catholic church that bring me closest to him in faith.

 

[excaliber]

Satan gets a checkmate? Don’t you think you’re being a tad melodramtic? I know what you’re saying. I can’t say with a straight face that Rome or the Eastern churches are not in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. And at the same time I cannot explain how the Church is one and is not in sacramental communion. I will put my trust in the Lord and worship in the catholic church that bring me closest to him in faith.

It would seem a little dramatic over the internet. Because you know nothing of me.

However it is good that you don’t have this confusion…but I do.

 

[excaliber]

The one that Jesus picked! The verse in my signature shows Jesus saying (in the plural) that Satan wanted to have at all of the Apostles…but then He went on to note that He prayed (in the singular sense) for Peter, that his faith would be true.

I’ll let other people more qualified than me help you out though - as far as I can tell, you aren’t the first to ask these questions, and so there are answers to them!

Are we reading more then what is there? How do we know Jesus did not pray for ALL the Apostles?

The bible is infallible…but it has writings from people OTHER then peter. Paul went out to visit churches and teach…not just Peter.

 

[VARC]

It would seem a little dramatic over the internet. Because you know nothing of me.

However it is good that you don’t have this confusion…but I do.

You are quite wrong. I do share that confusion. Only I dropped the either/or appraoch and have come to the conclusion that both groups, while having their own problems, are in the Catholic Church. My confusion is now how is it possible that the Catholic church has two groups that are not in sacramental communion with each other. That question is exponentially more difficult to answer.

 

[excaliber]

You are quite wrong. I do share that confusion. Only I dropped the either/or appraoch and have come to the conclusion that both groups, while having their own problems, are in the Catholic Church. My confusion is now how is it possible that the Catholic church has two groups that are not in sacramental communion with each other. That question is exponentially more difficult to answer.

The bible says that there is one faith one baptism.

I don’t see a middle ground,
You are for or against the Pope.

The bishop of rome is infallible…or the whole church is.

The creed is with or without the filique.

 

[Our_Refuge]

=excaliber;4201810]It is impossible to be sure!!!
It is obviously between Catholic and Orthodox. These are the only two that Jesus could have started.

The bible is not a tie breaker. Because the scripture that Catholics use to say that Jesus was building his church on peter, has the Apostles fussing about who is greater later in the chapter.

The binding and losing was also referred to in scripture to the Apostles, not just peter.

Tradition obviously dosent solve it, because both should have the same tradition from the apostles.

Only Peter was given the keys. Peter was given the authority to bind and loose separate from the other Apostles
Where Peter is, there is the Church.

Ask the Church Fathers

Tertullian
“Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called ‘the rock on which the Church would be built’ with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and on earth’ ?” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 22 [A.D. 200]).

“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ . . . . What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

Origen
"Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church And what does our Lord say to him? ‘Oh you of little faith,’ he says, ‘why do you doubt?’ " (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage
There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering" (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).

Ambrose of Milan
It is to Peter that he says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church is, no death is there, but life eternal" (Commentary on Twelve Psalms of David 40:30 [A.D. 389]).

 

[excaliber]

Only Peter was given the keys. Peter was given the authority to bind and loose separate from the other Apostles
Where Peter is, there is the Church.

Ask the Church Fathers

Tertullian
“Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called ‘the rock on which the Church would be built’ with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and on earth’ ?” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 22 [A.D. 200]).

“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ . . . . What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

Origen
"Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church And what does our Lord say to him? ‘Oh you of little faith,’ he says, ‘why do you doubt?’ " (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage
There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering" (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).

Ambrose of Milan
It is to Peter that he says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church is, no death is there, but life eternal" (Commentary on Twelve Psalms of David 40:30 [A.D. 389]).

I thought there was a scripture where all the apostles could bind and lose?

 

[mattkubes]

Are we reading more then what is there? How do we know Jesus did not pray for ALL the Apostles?

I like to think of this every once in a while: the Holy Spirit wasn’t known to waste Apostolic ink!

And this is one of those times when I wish English had the equivalent of the French “tu/vous”…so much meaning is lost! But I think it’s very important - the shift from saying Satan wanted to have all of them to Jesus saying that he prayed for “you Peter” (which is a singular you, unambiguously referring to one person…in most languages ) is pretty paramount. He even goes on to clarify that this prayer was for Peter to have true faith so that he could reaffirm the others.

I’m sure Jesus did pray for all the Apostles, but he went to the trouble of saying that, in this case, the prayer was a special one for Peter.

 

[excaliber]

I like to think of this every once in a while: the Holy Spirit wasn’t known to waste Apostolic ink!

And this is one of those times when I wish English had the equivalent of the French “tu/vous”…so much meaning is lost! But I think it’s very important - the shift from saying Satan wanted to have all of them to Jesus saying that he prayed for “you Peter” (which is a singular you, unambiguously referring to one person…in most languages ) is pretty paramount. He even goes on to clarify that this prayer was for Peter to have true faith so that he could reaffirm the others.

I’m sure Jesus did pray for all the Apostles, but he went to the trouble of saying that, in this case, the prayer was a special one for Peter.

Good point!!!

However I don’t think the Orthodox would argue, The argument is if Peter ALONE was infallible.

If so…the scripture where the ethiopian was helped with scripture and baptised…and ofcourse spread those teachings in ethiopia is interesting. Because I think that church is Orthodox…did he forget to tell that ethiopian that Peter was the visible head of the church? Its sorta hard to forget that. So why is the Ethiopian church Orthodox, if it was under Peter from the beginning?

How is it that EVERY other sea forgot that Peter was the head?

And why didn’t the Orthodox fall apart by now, if they have no head?

 

[Psalter]

It is impossible to be sure!!!
It is obviously between Catholic and Orthodox. These are the only two that Jesus could have started.

I have seen Orthodox and Catholics go back and forth…with out coming to any conclusion.

Well, there is no “Orthodox Church” per se–what you call the “Orthodox Church” is actually a collection of many autocephalous nationalistic churches, many of whom are not even in communion with one another. In Greece there are more than 30 different churches all claiming to be the REAL Greek Orthodox Church! If you don’t have a figurehead, like the pope, how do you determine which one is the real church? So I guess the so-called “Orthodox Church” doesn’t cut the test for being the ONE true Church, because it isn’t one at all. Remember the four marks of the true Church–(1) One, (2) Holy, (3) Catholic, (4) Apostolic. Which Church meets all four requirements? The Eastern “Orthodox Church” definitely does not meet (1) or (3).

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I follow Jesus and what he states; Mathew 16:18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock** I will build my church,** 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever **you **bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever **you **loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Where is Peter today? In the Roman Catholic Church, with unbroken succession to the present Pope who sits in Peter’s chair Pope Benedict 16th.

All other Catholics not in communion with Peter and his successors, are dealing with the problem of “authority” not the fundamental Catholic belief. You cant go wrong if you follow Jesus who has the final say.

Peace

 

[mattkubes]

I follow Jesus and what he states; Mathew 16:18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock** I will build my church,** 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

And to make it even more clear, it would have been “And so I say to you, you are Kephas, and upon this kephas I will build my church.”

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

And to make it even more clear, it would have been “And so I say to you, you are Kephas, and upon this kephas I will build my church.”

Ah yes, even through the Greek and latin translations the speech is not as dramatic as the Aramaic language that Jesus spoke confirms Jesus built his Church upon Peter (Kephas).

thanks for the clarification;

Peace be with you

 

[excaliber]

Well, there is no “Orthodox Church” per se–what you call the “Orthodox Church” is actually a collection of many autocephalous nationalistic churches, many of whom are not even in communion with one another. In Greece there are more than 30 different churches all claiming to be the REAL Greek Orthodox Church! If you don’t have a figurehead, like the pope, how do you determine which one is the real church? So I guess the so-called “Orthodox Church” doesn’t cut the test for being the ONE true Church, because it isn’t one at all. Remember the four marks of the true Church–(1) One, (2) Holy, (3) Catholic, (4) Apostolic. Which Church meets all four requirements? The Eastern “Orthodox Church” definitely does not meet (1) or (3).

Are you sure this is fact?
Do you have any documents?

I thought there were eastern Orthodox -Oriental Orthodox - and
Coptic Orthodox.

You are saying that the Eastern Orthodox are not one.
What proof do you have of this?

 

[Peter_J]

Hi excaliber,

For the most part, I’m not going to get involved in this thread. (With all the claims that have been made, I wouldn’t really know where to begin. )

Good point!!!

However I don’t think the Orthodox would argue, The argument is if Peter ALONE was infallible.

If so…the scripture where the ethiopian was helped with scripture and baptised…and ofcourse spread those teachings in ethiopia is interesting. Because I think that church is Orthodox…did he forget to tell that ethiopian that Peter was the visible head of the church? Its sorta hard to forget that. So why is the Ethiopian church Orthodox, if it was under Peter from the beginning?

Well yes and no.

The Ethiopian Church is one of what’s know as the “Oriental Orthodox” Churches.

After the Council of Chalcedon (431), there was a schism between the Oriental Orthodox Churches and the rest of the Church (which later split into the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches).

In more recent times, ecumenical advances have been made between the Oriental Orthodox and RCs & EOs; but especially between OO and EO, for which reason EO and OO are sometimes referred to collectively as “the Orthodox”, even though they are not yet in full communion with each other.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It would seem a little dramatic over the internet. Because you know nothing of me.

However it is good that you don’t have this confusion…but I do.

And I admire you for admitting it! Many folks come on here so sure of themselves spouting off about how they have the truth and everyone else is in darkness. You are simply on a quest for the truth and trying your best. I feel much the same way. I see SO MUCH beauty and truth in Catholicism but I have doubts about papal infallibility, indulgences, purgatory, the degree to which Mary has been exalted, works vs. faith, and the high degree to which tradition and institutions are raised above scripture. I have several questions and condundrums floating around. I appreciate your honesty and admire it.

 

[excaliber]

How is it possible that Jesus Christ
becomes present in Oriental–Coptic-- and Eastern Churches.
If these are outside the Catholic Church?

 

[ralphinal]

How is it possible that Jesus Christ
becomes present in Oriental–Coptic-- and Eastern Churches.
If these are outside the Catholic Church?

You must understand why they are outside. At various points in history, Churches became more isolated due to geography. Different rites started, including the Greek and Latin. Some of these different rites could show when they were founded by an Apostle, some by an Apostle’s student and so on. In other words, they had valid Apostolic succession. Overall, the Theology was identical. However, politics and other issues, again some of which were simple geography, caused the valid rites to drift apart. IN the end, you were left with a group of Churches that beleived the same things and could be traced back to Jesus. Some of these Churches went into scism, leading us to where we are today: some valid Churches accept the authority of Rome, some do not. Since it is not a matter of heresy or invalid orders, they all have valid sacraments.