One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aidanbradypop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

aidanbradypop

Guest
Some have touched on this subject in other threads. Many non Catholics do not proclaim a belief in the Creeds. They do not believe in OHCAC. For those who believe that they are members of the OHCAC that are not Catholic or Orthodox, how do you back up such belief if your denomination has broken away from the OHCAC? This has always puzzled me and I hope to gain an understanding with this thread! 🙂
 
I imagine it would be justified via a denial of apostolic succession and a church with clear structure and authority.
 
It will be a difference in their understanding of what that term means. They will either believe that it is us who broke away from them, or that the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is somehow divided into multiple Churches (therefore they must take a very different view of what the “One” part means, and the “Catholic” part as well).
 
The Church of England never broke away from the Catholic Church. She was unilaterally excommunicated by the Bishop of Rome (who also called for Elizabeth I to be overthrown and killed, and whose predecessor supported the Spanish Armada). Anglicans will argue that the Pope has no such power. Roman Catholics will disagree.

Either way, we are all very members incorporate in the mystical Body of Christ through Baptism which, creedally speaking, is the Catholic Church.
 
We would argue that our sinful divisions are internal (within the Church) rather than external (within and without). As such, we are still One even if, through our sins, we have wrought political divisions within that One Body.
 
Alright I’ll bite.

The way I think of it is like this:

Think of a piece of paper with something written on it, lets say for our purposes its the Nicean Creed. This is your undivided church. If you cut that piece of paper into two you have two smaller pieces of paper but those two pieces of paper are still bound together by the text written upon it. If you cut those two pieces up into even smaller pieces you now have lots of little bits of paper that is still paper and is still bound by the words written upon in. Maybe you don’t have all the words but through Tradition and tradition the text is kept alive in some part of each of those pieces.

Not saying that’s doctrinal or at all theologically serious, its just how I think of our point of view.
 
aidanbradypop said:
Some have touched on this subject in other threads. Many non Catholics do not proclaim a belief in the Creeds. They do not believe in OHCAC. For those who believe that they are members of the OHCAC that are not Catholic or Orthodox, how do you back up such belief if your denomination has broken away from the OHCAC? This has always puzzled me and I hope to gain an understanding with this thread! 🙂
Click to expand...
One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic are the four definitive signs that the Catholic Church is the true Church founded by Jesus Christ.
 
hmmm that does sound strange, i’ve never heard of anyone who would say that.
 
grannymh said:
One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic are the four definitive signs that the Catholic Church is the true Church founded by Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
Granny…I get that but how can a domination claim they are part of the OHCAC when they do not have all the sacraments?
 
aidanbradypop said:
Some have touched on this subject in other threads. Many non Catholics do not proclaim a belief in the Creeds. They do not believe in OHCAC. For those who believe that they are members of the OHCAC that are not Catholic or Orthodox, how do you back up such belief if your denomination has broken away from the OHCAC? This has always puzzled me and I hope to gain an understanding with this thread! 🙂
Click to expand...
um, what puzzles me is what this stands for…
call me ignorant because that is what I am.
For now…
and I’d like to follow this thread…
 
aidanbradypop said:
If they deny apostolic succession, how can they claim to be a member of the OHCAC?
Click to expand...
could it be that the other denominations have a different defintition of apostolic succession?
regardless of whether or not they should…
 
cheezey said:
could it be that the other denominations have a different defintition of apostolic succession?
regardless of whether or not they should…
Click to expand...
Sure.

If I say the sky should be called purple, does it make the sky purple or is the sky still blue? 😉

Many denominations simply reject Apostolic Succession. 🤷
 
nhylan said:
Alright I’ll bite.

The way I think of it is like this:

Think of a piece of paper with something written on it, lets say for our purposes its the Nicean Creed. This is your undivided church. If you cut that piece of paper into two you have two smaller pieces of paper but those two pieces of paper are still bound together by the text written upon it. If you cut those two pieces up into even smaller pieces you now have lots of little bits of paper that is still paper and is still bound by the words written upon in. Maybe you don’t have all the words but through Tradition and tradition the text is kept alive in some part of each of those pieces.

Not saying that’s doctrinal or at all theologically serious, its just how I think of our point of view.
Click to expand...
Right. Reminds me of this quote:
Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces.
Click to expand...
Whoever does not collect with me, scatters.
Click to expand...
The fact is that we do not have many smaller pieces. We have a book, and we have a few pages cut into thousands of little pieces. Do they belong to the book? Partially, yes. Do they bear the mark of unity? Obviously not 🤷 Christ wills one flock with one shepherd, and founded one visible, perpetual Church with authority and a hierarchy. Those who are not fully part of this Church are still Christians by virtue of a valid baptism and a certain degree of solid Christian tradition preserved amidst their doctrine, but not all pieces are equal, so to speak, nor are they individually equal to the book that holds the majority of the pages together.
 
aidanbradypop said:
Granny…I get that but how can a domination claim they are part of the OHCAC when they do not have all the sacraments?
Click to expand...
Denominations can claim anything they wish. One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic are signs or marks of the true Church. They are not the Church per se. Try looking first at the Catholic Church which is a visible organization on earth. What are its signs, marks, characteristics? OHCAC 😃 What can happen with various denominations is that the “Marks” or “Signs” are only partially there if at all. A good approach is to explain the Marks so the comparison is obvious.

When we go into the meaning of the four marks, the differences can be seen between the Catholic Church and other denominations.

For example. The Catholic Church is Apostolic because we rely on the faith of the Apostolic Age and accept as sacred truth the books of the Old and New Testaments. We do not omit chapter 6 from the Gospel of John nor do we slide by chapter 14 from John’s Gospel.

The continuity of our Apostolic Faith is clearly manifested in the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
 
aidanbradypop said:
Sure.

If I say the sky should be called purple, does it make the sky purple or is the sky still blue? 😉

Many denominations simply reject Apostolic Succession. 🤷
Click to expand...
Are there not those that do not reject Apostolic Succession, but believe it to mean something else from the CC??.
 
cheezey said:
could it be that the other denominations have a different defintition of apostolic succession?
regardless of whether or not they should…
Click to expand...
Yes, Church Father Tertullian was well aware of this when around AD 200 he wrote:
But if there be any which are bold enough to plant [their origin] in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [their first] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men—a man, moreover, who continued steadfast with the apostles. For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers. …]
Click to expand...
But should they even effect the contrivance [of composing a succession list for themselves], they will not advance a step. For their very doctrine, after comparison with that of the apostles [as contained in other churches], will declare, by its own diversity and contrariety, that it had for its author neither an apostle nor an apostolic man; because, as the apostles would never have taught things which were self-contradictory.
Click to expand...
Then let all the heresies, when challenged to these two tests by our apostolic Church, offer their proof of how they deem themselves to be apostolic. But in truth they neither are so, nor are they able to prove themselves to be what they are not. Nor are they admitted to peaceful relations and communion by such churches as are in any way connected with apostles, inasmuch as they are in no sense themselves apostolic because of their diversity as to the mysteries of the faith.
Click to expand...
🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top