So, i hear...

[Dokimas]

original post: Prodigal Son; Doki’s comments in color;

It just seems to say, that if none of the Churches today, are like those Churches then, Christ’s Church didn’t make it?? It seems that way to you because you see the Church as an organization; I see it as an organism of all believers, some more obedient than others. I’d have to admit I need to be much more obedient.

Just making a point here, but we’ve discussed ‘tradtion’, scriptures even speaks of them and tells us to hold to them. How do you know for sure that some of the traditions you hold are not the positive traditions of the verses you have cite but are the negative traditions of the verses I’ve cited? Surely those Churches then would know those traditions specifically. Now, if those traditions are not specifically spelled out point by point, as we know them today, where can we look too to understand those traditions. Christ told His Church He wouldn’t leave us orphans. The only place left to look is the writings of the early Church fathers. That’s why I look to the 27 books of the NT.

The Church then was young when scriptures were written. Those traditions were widely believed and it wasn’t necessary to explain them point by point, after all the Apostles, authors of scriptures, knew their teachings, traditions, were safe with those they appointed to succeed them. Remember, they all believed Christ would return in their lifetimes. Is this the reason they didn’t begin writing in the beginning? You don’t think the teaching of the CC about Mary is important enough for the original apostles to have made comment about it? You don’t think the host actually being the real presence of Jesus is important enough for the original apostles to spell it out for us? If the church Jesus set up was called the Catholic Church, don’t you think the original apostles would have spelled it out for us?

Scriptures themselves were written between 50AD and as late as 110AD, give or take. Christ died and resurrected around 33AD, again give or take. Writing them seemed to be an after thought to the authors, with the exception of Paul who wrote many letters of correction. Did they come to the realization that Christ might possibly not come in their lifetimes and then decide they better write everything down? Remember John told us, twice, that Christ did many things and the world itself could not contain all the books written, had they been written.

So the early Church father’s writings are not considered scripture. It’s not sacred tradition? They give insight to how they were practicing Christianity from the beginning, the beginning being around 110AD, not counting the Didache, which may have been written earlier but is unidentifiable as to who wrote it, and then it’s not specific.

Common sense with any new establishment is the older it is, the more details are documented.

It seems alot of Protestants won’t consider the writings of the early Church fathers Not true; it’s just not taken as 100% accurate, using an excuse that their not scriptures, but primarily because upon close inspection, there’s a trend supporting Catholic beliefs. With that said, they can offer no other documentation prior to the 1500s. Christians thoughtout history and into the present day are constantly writing about their faith.

I don’t believe Christ’s Church failed nor do I, and I believe there are documents throughout history so do I and some great books have been written over the last century, too . I’m reading a book now by Flavius Josephus, a Jewish general from the war with the Romans. If his writings could have survived, surely Church documents survived.

What does one have to lose reading the writings of the early Church fathers? Anyone that knows Christ can tell those writings were written by Christians. But not infallible, IMO. There’s the link again.

This is not an attempt to try and convert anyone. And it didn’t work I believe you are seeking Him Thank You and so are you. , and if you’re like me, you want to worship Him the way He wants us to worship (YES) and not the way that comfortable to us, or fits our lifestyle. True

 

[humblelurker]

We have sacred tradition and always have had it…Tradition came before the Bible…the protestants reject tradition…I think they have nothing much in common with the early church predating the bible.we are not sola scriptura people

They don’t even have faith in Jesus? They don’t even have any of St. Paul’s letters?

 

[redrosetea]

It is a change!

You are wrong

The tradition of praying for the dead is not practiced solely by Catholics. Jews offered such prayers since before Christ. As recorded in 2 Mac. 12:45[7], “*t was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.” They still offer prayers for the dead for one year after their death and on the anniversaries of their death. This prayer is known as the “kaddish.”[8] The early Christians, including those living at the time of St. Paul, already had a well developed tradition of praying for the dead.

cuf.org/Faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=120*

 

[Dokimas]

no, Dok

what i am saying is that in the Church many serious issues can come up. and if a case of brother sin against the other the issue may be solved in the local parish. but a local CC is not a separate Church. she is still One Church. obviously, if i live in the US, i could not go to the CC in germany or Mexico or wherever. therefore, a Catholic Church must be built wherever the people are. when we enter the CC, we are not entering in the CC of St Mary’s in washington, or new york, we are entering into the One Holy Catholic Church with the pope and the Bishops in commnion with pope. it is a mistery.

**“the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.” **

And I thought you were making fun of us that we take an issue to our local church.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

What are the similarities and what are the changes.?

I was attempting to show similarities between worship ‘services’. If you wish to go beyond that, we cannot look at the Church during the first 400 years when it suffered persecutions under penalty of death. Surely that fact creates great differences between then and now.

Another point one has to consider is the Church then was just beginning and growing into what it was meant to be. Over time, and the end of persecutions, more was documented for the edifications of all. With that said, we do have documentations prior to the end of the persecutions and those documentations are more and more similar to the Catholic Church than others.

 

[redrosetea]

They don’t even have faith in Jesus? They don’t even have any of St. Paul’s letters?

They think the bible fell from the sky or was handed to the church by Christ…There was no Bible for the first 400 years and people were still taught and married and buried and baptized all without the Bible…but that deposit of faith is rejected by Protestants

 

[jericho777]

Jericho.

this is not just about believing. just because i believe it doesnt make it so.

Jesus built One Church and to her He made promises. He instituted the Eucharist with His Church, the Heavenly Jerusalem. He stablished a Covenant with His chosen people.
while the Jewish priests(highpriest) were slaughting animals for sacrificing at the temple to celebrate the Old Covenant Jesus was stablishing a New Covenant with His Chosen Ones, He(Jesus the Highpriest) was offering His Own Body and Blood for the forgiveness of sins. the same thing that the jews were doing when sacrificing animals for the forgiveness of sins of the jews.
when the pagans wanted to know about God, they would go to the Jews. it would be through the Jews. it is the same. it has not changed. the Church, found by a Jew, it is on this Church that we must receive the Eucharist. He chose us, we didnt choose Him.

reading the Bible and claiming the promises that were made to the Church, is like you are the one choosing.

** “the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.” **

I think where we differ is what is the church and the authority that is given to all believers. I’m not personally claiming the promises to the body of believers. Your church allows a different role for believers than are explained in scripture. You have an elevated priesthood whereas there was more of a colaborer attitude in the first church. I don’t know what knowledge you have of bible based churches but they try to emulate the first century model.

 

[Dokimas]

Dok,

it must be a True Church, otherwise how could anyone know the Truth? The Bible. and the Holy Spirit.

Jesus said. the Spirit of Truth will come and teach you(the Apostles) all Truth and I will be with until the ends of time. if the CC is wrong, then protestants are the one that have the the Truth, protestants congregations is the Church of the Bible. there is no such a thing is a little Truth here and a little Truth there. together we make up the whole Truth. there is no such thing, Dok. is Jesus divided in to many parts?

Dok, please dont tell me that Jesus does not fullfill His Promises. Of course He does; just not exactly like you and I think He does. Remember it’s often a mystery.

** “A Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body; cut off, he is made a heretic; the Spirit does not follow an amputated member.” ** I guess you’re calling me a heretic.****
Saint Augustine…

 

[spn82756]

I was attempting to show similarities between worship ‘services’. If you wish to go beyond that, we cannot look at the Church during the first 400 years when it suffered persecutions under penalty of death. Surely that fact creates great differences between then and now.

Another point one has to consider is the Church then was just beginning and growing into what it was meant to be. Over time, and the end of persecutions, more was documented for the edifications of all. With that said, we do have documentations prior to the end of the persecutions and those documentations are more and more similar to the Catholic Church than others.

More similar than the Orthodox? Before the addition of the%between%Filioque?

 

[humblelurker]

They think the bible fell from the sky or was handed to the church by Christ…There was no Bible for the first 400 years and people were still taught and married and buried and baptized all without the Bible…but that deposit of faith is rejected by Protestants

That don’t answer the question. Are you saying that they have absolutly nothing at all in common with the early church? Nothing at all? No faith in Christ? No St. Paul’s letters? Nothing at all?

 

[spn82756]

They think the bible fell from the sky or was handed to the church by Christ…There was no Bible for the first 400 years and people were still taught and married and buried and baptized all without the Bible…but that deposit of faith is rejected by Protestants

Now that is totally uninformed

 

[jericho777]

Ok, we are ‘edging’ into an agreement, removing some semantics. What’s still holding us back from a full agreement is the other discussion we were having. The example you use here took place in a synagogue, the other discussion it took place in a home. Homes were modest then, to say the least.

It would be easier if you returned to the other thread and discussed all the points raised…

My head is spinning from all this. I have made so many posts I can’t remember what’s what any more.

 

[spn82756]

That don’t answer the question. Are you saying that they have absolutly nothing at all in common with the early church? Nothing at all? No faith in Christ? No St. Paul’s letters? Nothing at all?

That is a totally misinformed statement by the person you are quoting.

 

[redrosetea]

That don’t answer the question. Are you saying that they have absolutly nothing at all in common with the early church? Nothing at all? No faith in Christ? No St. Paul’s letters? Nothing at all?

I am saying that they way they worship hasn’t anything in common with the early church…the Eucharist for example…I am not saying they don’t accept scripture or love Christ…you are twisting my words…I am saying they reject all tradition predating the Bible

 

[spn82756]

My head is spinning from all this. I have made so many posts I can’t remember what’s what any more.

Now that we are in agreement with. My head is spinning. But that is good. We’ve got a good discussion going on between brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[redrosetea]

Now that is totally uninformed

I t is your opinion not mine

 

[redrosetea]

The concept of purgatory was not at all foreign to the early church…they were Jews they understood praying for the dead…St Paul says he was a Pharisee and they prayed for their dead

from Fisheaters

Daniel 12:2, Matthew 12:32, 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, 2 Timothy 1:16-18, Hebrews 12:14, Hebrews 12:22-23, 1 Peter 4:6 and Revelation 21:10, 27 all speak of Purgatory in their telling of the need for purification, prayers for the dead, Christ’s preaching to the dead, or how nothing unclean will see God.

Tertullian comes right out and says in The Crown 3:3, dated A.D. 211, “We offer sacrifices for the dead on their birthday anniversaries”. Cyprian of Carthage writes in A.D. 253:

It is one thing to stand for pardon, another thing to attain to glory; it is one thing, when cast into prison, not to go out thence until one has paid the uttermost farthing; another thing at once to receive the wages of faith and courage. It is one thing, tortured by long suffering for sins, to be cleansed and long purged by fire; another to have purged all sins by suffering. It is one thing, in fine, to be in suspense till the sentence of God at the day of judgment; another to be at once crowned by the Lord.

From St. John Chrysostom in his Homilies on 1 Corinthians 41:5, A.D. 392:

Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.

to St. Augustine’s A.D. 419. City of God:

Temporal punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by some after death, by some both here and hereafter, but all of them before that last and strictest judgment. But not all who suffer temporal punishments after death will come to eternal punishments, which are to follow after that judgment"

the Church Fathers speak of purgation.

Archaeology also indicates the antiquity of the Christian belief in Purgatory/the Final Theosis: the tombs of the ancient Christians were inscribed with words of petition for peace and for rest, and at the anniversaries of deaths, the faithful gathered at the graves of the departed to make intercession for those who’d gone before.

Orthodox Jewish practices, which branched off from the Old Testament religion, to this day reflect belief in this “place” of final purification which they call Gehenom: when an Orthodox Jewish person dies, a ritual called the taharah is performed by the “Chevra kaddisha – gmilat khessed shel emet,” the “Holy Society” or “Burial Society” of Jews knowledgeable in these traditional duties. They cleanse and prepare the physical body and recite the required prayers (Chevra Kadisha) which ask God for forgiveness for any sins the departed may have committed, and beg Him to guard and grant eternal peace to the departed. For eleven months after the death of a loved one certain members of the family pray a prayer called the Mourner’s Qaddish (or Kaddish) for their loved one’s purification.

Even the The Talmud1 speaks of Purgatory:

Sabbath 33b:
"The judgment of the wicked in purgatory is twelve months."

Rosh HaShanah 16b-17a:
"It has been taught that the school of Shammai says: "There will be three groups on Judgment Day (yom haDin):
  (1) one that is completely righteous,
  (2) one that is completely wicked,
  (3) and one that is in between."

The completely righteous will be recorded and sealed at once for eternal life. The completely wicked will be recorded and doomed at once to Gehinnom, as it says: "And many who sleep in the dust of the earth shall rise up, some to eternal life and some to shame and eternal rejection" [Daniel 12:2]. Those in between will go down to Gehinnom and cry out and rise up, as it says: "And I will bring the third part through the fire and refine them as silver is refined and test them as gold is tested. They will call on my name and I will answer them" [Zechariah 13:9]

Rabbi Shammai (50 BC - AD 30), one of the two main teachers of early rabbinical Judaism, also is on record as having interpreted Zechariah 13:9 as referring to a state of purification after death. Isaiah 66:15-16 and Malachi 3:2-3 were also interpreted in rabbinic literature as referring to the purgatorial process, and the same theme is reflected in Wisdom 3:1-7 and II Maccabees 12:43-45, both contained in the Deuterocanonical books that Protestants refer to as “The Apocrypha.”

Jews, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox have always proclaimed the reality of the final purification for those who need it. It was not until the Protestant Reformers came in the 1500s that any Christians denied the idea of a final purgation before seeing the face of God.

 

[humblelurker]

Now that we are in agreement with. My head is spinning. But that is good. We’ve got a good discussion going on between brothers and sisters in Christ.

I have to agree.

Now what did I say?

 

[spn82756]

I t is your opinion not mine

What do we as Catholics have that HAS NOT CHANGED from early Church. The early Church did not believe in purgatory.

 

[redrosetea]

What do we as Catholics have that HAS NOT CHANGED from early Church. The early Church did not believe in purgatory.

Well tell that to the early church fathers