Is the CC the church of Matthew 16?

[tweetymom]

Just naughty!!!

Yea naughty but nice.

 

[spn82756]

Yea naughty but nice.

 

[JonNC]

I have found Joe370 to be someone who debates from an honest desire to defend his faith, and yet be charitable. I find the personal attacks unfounded.

**This a question for all Christians belonging to a Protestant Church, as opposed to Christians belonging the the Catholic Church, for they all (including myself) - feel that they (I) - have the answer; prove us wrong?

I can give you the name of the person who founded each and every Protestant church, in the world today, and his name was/is not Jesus Christ.

Please give me the name of the man (or men) - that founded the Catholic Church (or the RCC, if you prefer calling it that) - and WHEN?

Thanks… **

Joe,
The Augsburg Confession says:

Article VII: Of the Church.

1] Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever. **The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered. **
2] And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and 3] the administration of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. 4] As Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph. 4:5-6.

Lutherans (I cannot / will not speak for others) view the Church as more than as an institution or organization, per se. Therefore, those in communion with the Bishop of Rome are certainly part of that Church founded by Christ. So are Lutherans, Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodist, etc.
If one wants to talk about a particular organization or “denomination”, I would say the Great Schism, and the division of 500 years ago make that designation difficult at best.
Suffice it to say that His Church and ministry are wounded by schism and division, and instead of arguing over which is the true Church (like the disciples arguing over their place in importance) we should be working and praying for the unity He called for.

Jon

 

[joe370]

Hey Jon…

I have found Joe370 to be someone who debates from an honest desire to defend his faith, and yet be charitable. I find the personal attacks unfounded.

Thanks for the kind words. I would never claim to be, what a few have said about me here. I don’t have any theological qualifications/credentials, other than an avid desire to know what truth is, regarding the teachings, revealed by Christ, to His established church.

I am in no way attempting to undercut any non-Catholic churches, if in fact the answer to my question, is Jesus Christ. I love all churches, regardless of affiliation, for the most part, for they bring salvation (Jesus Christ) - to the world. I just want confirmation that the CC (or the RCC) - has a founder other that our Lord Jesus Christ. Think about it for a minute? If someone can prove that the CC was founded by someone other than Jesus, and I can prove that each and every PC was founded by someone other than Jesus, then where in the heck is the church founded by Jesus? We are left with nothing but isolated, autonomous churches founded by men as opposed to God. If people like Moondweller and Josiah and John Huss, are right about the CC, then where is the church founded by Jesus, on Pentecost, in Jerusalem, circa AD 33, that has traversed every century since the time the Apostles walked the earth? Very confusing.

Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
This a question for all Christians belonging to a Protestant Church, as opposed to Christians belonging the the Catholic Church, for they all (including myself) - feel that they (I) - have the answer; prove us wrong?

I can give you the name of the person who founded each and every Protestant church, in the world today, and his name was/is not Jesus Christ.

Please give me the name of the man (or men) - that founded the Catholic Church (or the RCC, if you prefer calling it that) - and WHEN?

The Augsburg Confession says:
Quote:
Article VII: Of the Church.

1] Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever.

I agree!

The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered.

Again, I agree. I doubt that everyone will agree with you regarding the Sacraments though.

2] And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and 3] the administration of the Sacraments.

Agreed!

Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike.

I agree that human tradition, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, are not alike.

4] As Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph. 4:5-6.

We as brothers and sisters in Christ (regardless of church affiliation) - are definitely united as one, regarding faith in Jesus, as our one and only Savior. However, we are not all united when it comes to doctrinal truth ie the Sacrament of Baptism, and how it was/is to be administered. Many Christians do not believe that baptism by water is necessary, (the church to which my sister belongs) - and clearly state that those who do, are wrong. Who can we rely on to settle the matter, once and for all. No one anymore, it seems.

Lutherans (I cannot / will not speak for others) view the Church as more than as an institution or organization, per se.

Each and every independent, isolated, autonomous church in the world today, was instituted by someone, and is clearly organized, don’t you think?

Therefore, those in communion with the Bishop of Rome are certainly part of that Church founded by Christ.

I agree, of course. However, the CC is not considered part of that church by many, as you know, which is not the case with the CC, as you know:

“However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.” CCC

So are Lutherans, Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodist, etc.

Agreed. They are all part of the Mystical Body of Christ. Like the CC says; “one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation].”

If one wants to talk about a particular organization or “denomination”, I would say the Great Schism, and the division of 500 years ago make that designation difficult at best.

As far as which church (the EOC or the CC) - is the church of Matthew 16. I would agree, for these are the only 2 churches that existed since Pentecost, until the Protestant reformation. I would add, if one wants to talk about a particular denomination, one really wouldn’t be able to, until the Protestant reformation. I respectfully disagree with you regarding your belief that the division resulting from the reformation, of last 500 years, makes that designation difficult at best, but, as you know, I totally respect your opinion.

 

[joe370]

Hi Jon…

Trick question alert, designed to show the superior intellect of Joe370…

Jon, your signature says:

*"In a hundred years, God will raise up a man whose calls for reform cannot be suppressed." Jon Hus- July 6, 1415.

I know that Jan Hus ( who had some very legitimate complaints about the abuses taking place in the CC, at the time) - eventually rejected the Mass, the papacy and the tradition of the church, again due to the abuses in the CC. His disputes with authority did not concern basic theological issues, but rather matters of church discipline and practice of that time. Jan held that the CC officials ought to exercise spiritual powers only, and not be earthly governors, and I agree with him. He said: no pope or bishop has a right to take up the sword in the name of the Church; he should pray for his enemies and bless those that curse him, and again I agree with him.

Francis of Assisi of the 12th century, was confronted with similar circumstances. From the cross in the neglected field-chapel of San Damiano, Christ told him, “Francis, go out and build up my house, for it is nearly falling down.” Francis became a totally poor and humble workman trusting in the power of Jesus Christ to do as He promised, regardless of the devil’s endless attack against His Mystical Body, the church, to which He is the Savior. He founded a new order, as opposed to a new church, and he protected it and accepted all the legal structures needed to support it. His devotion and loyalty to the CC (regardless of the various people in the CC doing Satan’s work) - were highly exemplary at a time when various movements of reform tended to break the Church’s unity, which ultimately fractures the unity of Jesus’ Mystical Body. His actions definitely reveal that this was selective, but he kept his will checked and relied on the Will of Jesus Christ. I think Jan Hus was an exemplary man himself, in a climate that was highly volatile too, and in dire need of reform, in certain parts of the church, but the mistake he made, I think, was not putting all of his trust in our Lord Jesus Christ, as did Francis. Easy for me to say… I am not entirely sure if I would have been as trusting in Christ as Francis was, in the face of the abuses that conflicted with the will of Christ, but one thing is for sure: Francis through prayer, humility, charity and trust in Christ (as opposed to his driving will to reform things himself) - and the church Jesus built (is still building up) - allowed him to preach boldly and powerfully, by emphasizing personal repentance, a personal relationship with Jesus, as Lord, King and Savior, and the sacrifice of Jesus the Christ, by which our salvation is obtained, all things Jan did, would have done with the same zeal, if perhaps, he would have abandoned his natural instincts/will to reform, and trusted in the true Reformer. Jan Hus didn’t always reject church tradition, papal authority and the Mass, just as Francis never did. He allowed his Christ like desires for the church built by Christ, to galvanize him into temporal action, when he should have (in my humble opinion) - resorted to spiritual supplication, submitting totally to the will of God as opposed to his own good- hearted will.

Francis, (like Jan) - was a powerful, authentic bible preacher in an era when this was rare. Thanks to his trust in Christ’s will, as opposed to his own will, which led to his allegiance to the church founded by Christ, in good times and bad, he was able to do what Jan, sadly was not permitted to do. At the same time, as a holy hermit, he gave a resounding “no” to the preoccupation with getting rich, (just as Jan Hus did) - but without advancing any major uprising against the abuses of the CC. His weapon of reform was the will of Jesus Christ alone, as opposed to the bible alone, and the results of his trust in Christ, to save HIS church, was the fact that Francis was allowed to start an order (as opposed to another church) - insisting that his brothers should be below their fellows and seek the last and lowest places, just as Jan Hus believed. Francis appealed his order to manual labor and received things necessary for life, not money, just as Jan Hus did. Many cities were anxious to have these brothers visit them, and small communities began in cities, starting in Italy. The members of these communities were so numerous that the order was divided into provinces. Eventually missions extended beyond the Alps to Spain, Germany, and Hungary etc. Thanks to his trust in Christ’s will as opposed to human will, there are now three branches of Friars: Friars Minor, Friars Minor Capuclin (to which Father Corapi belongs; he is one of the reasons why I am a catholic today; I think you would like him, just as many Protestants do) - and Friars Minor Correntual. United, the Order of St. Francis is one of the most numerous religious institutes in the CC today. I believe, as many do, that Francis did more than any other man to save medieval Church from decay and revolution, and he did it by simply submitting to Jesus’ will as opposed to his own will!

I am reminded of Matthew 7 when Jesus said:

“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.”

I have often wondered why, when I knocked, Jesus never answered. Perhaps the reason he never answered was because, what I was asking for, was not in accordance with His divine will. In the end, if we do God’s will, as did Francis, and not our own, as did Jan (with Christ like intentions) - whether things work out for us in this world or not, we win in the end, don’t you think?

Peace brother…

 

[rinnie]

-]/-]

Might not the answer be Peter? For [SIGN]Jesus gave Peter [/SIGN]the Keys to his kingdom as in Matt 16:19. Or look in John 21:15-17 where Jesus tells Peter to Feed My Sheep, or Acts 15:7, during the first Church Council, the Council of Jerusalem where Peter go up and said, Brethren, you know that in early days God Made choice among us, that through MY mouth the Gentiles should hear the wo[SIGN][/SIGN]rd of the Gospel and believe. From Peter is where the Jeusu Christs Church started which happens to be the univerisal Church (Catholic).

You just answered the question yourself. JESUS gavr Peter the keys. It was Jesus who gave them to Peter not Peter to Jesus.