Trail of Blood and nowadays Baptists

[James_Least]

James,

Without the actual, visible Church, centered on the unity of the Eucharist, the real Body and Blood of Christ, then the mere mental concept of church is speculative, relative.

Jesus did not make any mistakes. He provided shepherds and a visible church for us. It took hundreds of years, where the first 300 were underground, where the Church could become a public, human institution.

It all gets down to trusting the Holy Spirit working through His apostles and successors. There is no perfection on this earth except in heaven. Our individual work is to discover the true faith and our path in it which is the Apostolic faith that comes from the Oral Tradition of Christ.

You have to look beyond your sources…to the apostles themselves and their associations. Surely they would not trust to mentor followers who would then in turn betray the mission and saving power of Christ.

Are you following me here?

No.

I kind of understand some of your allusion.

With all the betrayal of trust in the rank and file priesthood and the cover-up all the way through the Vatican, I would have great difficulty finding a trustworthy bishop(also translated pastor) among those called Universal. Putting trust in man will always leave one empty. Trusting Jesus is the only answer. The doctrines of men will leave us in the ditch. Been there, done that.

Peace,

James Least

 

[KathleenGee]

We put our trust in Christ and the teachings given us the Apostles. The priests administer the sacraments…it is keeping our eye on Christ and His mystical church. Once you understand that, then you can accept the chaff with the wheat.

If we do not have visible signs, then everything is arbitrary.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I belong to the church Jesus is building. cf: John 3:16-21. I have started nothing myself and certainly do not need a dubbing from Rome, Wittenburg, Canterbury or Nauvoo.

Jesus is not building on a man. Man cannot handle it–being depraved by nature.
Jesus builds the church on Himself–the Chief Cornerstone.He needs no vicar nor co-redemptrix.

Peace,

James Least

James, unless you were there with Jesus 2000 yrs ago or are in the CC, you are inventing something new.
you have not ansewered this question. how did you hear or know about Christ 2000 years later?

:knight1::knight2:

 

[AwGusTeen]

Bibliographic reference please.

I gave you the Bibliographic reference:

Letter CL "Alberto Bavariae Duci“ (ibid.): Read the Church history of the period.

This one may not go away–even with high-tech speculation.

Since the author of the book has recanted, I take nothing that he claimed in his work as legitimate. Good luck with that!

The Orthodox immerse–they go way back too.

I hate to break this to you James, but I was Baptised two Easters ago in our new Church which has a Baptismal pool. I was emersed as well. The Church does not condem emersion… that’s a red herring.

They do not bow to the papacy either. Are they heretics?.

Bowing is a sign of respect and is not a requirement of salvation. So, no – they are not heretics. Happy now?

 

[OmegaSupreme]

No.

I kind of understand some of your allusion.

With all the betrayal of trust in the rank and file priesthood and the cover-up all the way through the Vatican, I would have great difficulty finding a trustworthy bishop(also translated pastor) among those called Universal. Putting trust in man will always leave one empty. Trusting Jesus is the only answer. The doctrines of men will leave us in the ditch. Been there, done that.

Forgive me for having bowed out of the discussion earlier. I’ve been recovering from illness the last few days.

But what you said here is something I can turn right around on any other Christian denomination. I have no trust for Fundamentalist pastors, as I’ve known too many who stretch the truth without thinking twice about it (and no, I’m not alluding to their theology).

And you’re right. Trusting Jesus is the only answer. My trust is in that He gave us a deposit of faith in the Catholic church, which is verifiable through the last 2000 years.

 

[James_Least]

Sounds like a legalistic quagmire to me. From what I have read both sides, East and West, had anathamatized each other circa 1054. How does one understand this? Recently, they both unanthamatized each other. During the interim, who was the heretic? Who decides?

Then there is the papal edict which anathamatizes anyone who denies the infallibility of the pope. Does the East not continue to deny papal infallibility? Would they still be anathema? Or only half excommunicated?

If someone is anathama, what happens to all the sacraments they perform?

Who has the authority to change the commandments of Jesus?

Peace,

James Least

 

[qui_est_ce]

Hi James-
I can see the Holy Spirit is really calling you to CAF. You are trying to answer so many questions here.

Could you possibly respond to my post about Authority?

With all the betrayal of trust in the rank and file priesthood and the cover-up all the way through the Vatican, I would have great difficulty finding a trustworthy bishop(also translated pastor) among those called Universal.

And yet Jesus had no problem telling Peter he was the Rock upon which he would build his Church after Peter betrayed him three times!

Putting trust in man will always leave one empty. Trusting Jesus is the only answer. The doctrines of men will leave us in the ditch. Been there, done that.

Amen, that’s why I follow the Church which was instituted by Christ and given the guidance of the Holy Spirit which will not let the Gates of Hell prevail against her. :harp::bowdown::bowdown:

 

[qui_est_ce]

In the interest of keeping this thread from being closed, I think it would be a good idea to stick to the topic, which is the Church is the Church since it was instituted by Christ. Catholics are arguing there is no Trail of Blood.

Dilemmas irrelevant to the topic are thrown out, which we in charity we are trying to address, thus derailing the thread.

God bless all who are participating.

 

[James_Least]

Back on track: No trail of blood? How do we understand: Rev. 17:6, “And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered…”

Jesus told His disciples they would be witnesses of Him. Witness= Martyr in etymology class–in the real world too. The bloody trail started with John the Baptist, in terms of the NT. Jesus was next. Then came the apostles. The Truth has been bloodied even through today–it is part of the witness.

Even so, come Lord Jesus,

Peace,
James Least

 

[qui_est_ce]

In the interest of keeping this thread from being closed, I think it would be a good idea to stick to the topic, which is the Church is the Church since it was instituted by Christ. Catholics are arguing there is no Trail of Blood.

Dilemmas irrelevant to the topic are thrown out, which we in charity we are trying to address, thus derailing the thread.

God bless all who are participating.

I believe the Trail of Blood in the OP was referring to a book by Milton Carroll that was written in 1931. Milton Carroll claims there was a remnant Christian sect which never followed that Catholic Church. Somehow this remnant came out of the closet during the Reformation as Baptists.

 

[James_Least]

The statement is made in #176 above that: “Catholics are arguing there is no trail of blood.”

My last post addressed that statement. This is all still germane to the pamphlet “Trail of Blood”.

Will someone please address Rev. 17:6?

Peace,

James Least

 

[qui_est_ce]

The statement is made in #176 above that: “Catholics are arguing there is no trail of blood.”

My last post addressed that statement. This is all still germane to the pamphlet “Trail of Blood”.

Will someone please address Rev. 17:6?

Peace,

James Least

Nero was getting drunk on the blood of the martyrs. The Whore of Babylon is Rome.
Rev 17:6-9:

6 I saw that the woman was drunk on the blood of the holy ones and on the blood of the witnesses to Jesus. 6 When I saw her I was greatly amazed.
7
The angel said to me, "Why are you amazed? I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, the beast with the seven heads and the ten horns.
8
The beast that you saw existed once but now exists no longer. It will come up from the abyss and is headed for destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world shall be amazed when they see the beast, because it existed once but exists no longer, and yet it will come again.
9
Here is a clue 8 for one who has wisdom. ***The seven heads represent seven hills upon which the woman sits. ***

The seven hills of Rome.

 

[FCEGM]

Nero was getting drunk on the blood of the martyrs. The Whore of Babylon is Rome.

The seven hills of Rome.

While Babylon is no doubt Rome (e.g. pagan Rome with its empire), “the whore” is very likely Jerusalem.

 

[KathleenGee]

Oh boy…sentiments like this were covered the other day on one of the Mormon threads…

All this namecalling and labelling…we live in such days.

 

[qui_est_ce]

While Babylon is no doubt Rome (e.g. pagan Rome with its empire), “the whore” is very likely Jerusalem.

Very interesting. I’ve never heard of Jerusalem being the whore, but that makes sense in light of OT, especially Hosea.

Blessed CHRISTMAS to you!

 

[KathleenGee]

Yes, about the reference to Jerusalem…

I heard something this past year that when Christ came, that was the time the Jewish faith was about to collapse…I am not sure…something to look up…

Ancient Rome was excess to the max…that we have modern art form of movies showing the slaves on the lower level boiling the water for the upstairs baths while the Romans are having lavish parties…

The Romans enslaved people from all over and all walks of life. They would parade the new slaves continually through Rome…people in chains, scholars in chains…

The mass populace had to stand in line to get their food and then they had to go to the games…because the slaves did the work…and the government did not want the populace to get out of control.

People would attend these horrible and violent games. The coliseums had colorful banners overhead that would be unfurled outwards towards the center to use for shade against the Roman sun. At the end of the day, with all the carnage below and subsequent stench, these perfume vials throughout would turn on fragrance to cover the smell. Young slaves were used for sex, many used up by age 16 and nothing at 21.

So when these slaves became Christian it was such a tremendous interior liberation and redemption for them…the nobility converted…and Christians went to the tombs of the dead as the Romans were afraid of those places and had Mass…

The light of Christ entering Rome from the dead below the city. The Holy Spirit led some of the Apostles into the very center of the Evil Empire to make it the center of faith. So you have this contradiction between Rome the Harlot and the Seat of Peter. To some, the filth of ancient Rome splashed on the Seat of Peter.

However, to pick Rome, that gives me great hope that Christ overcomes all difficulties…but He works through human nature and that takes time.

Merry Christmas everyone!!

 

[FCEGM]

Very interesting. I’ve never heard of Jerusalem being the whore, but that makes sense in light of OT, especially Hosea.

I first heard this proposed by Scott Hahn in his audio presentation on the Book of Revelation; he drew out the comparisons between John’s descriptions, Hosea and other OT works, and the Fall of Jerusalem. He recommended a book by a Protestant writer, the late David Chilton, Days of Vengeance, which further addresses the identification of “the whore” as Jerusalem.

Blessed CHRISTMAS to you!

And to you and yours! :harp: CHRISTUS NATUS EST!