What does 'Church no, Jesus yes' mean?

[Prodigal_Son1]

There has to be some kind of authority!
I mean, like everywhere, also religions need “rules”.
The CC has it’s “rules” by the CCC, the Magesterium and the Apostolic Succession.
But also the Baptist Church(es) have their “rules” and, naturally, a pastor knows them.
So he has authority.
I am fairly new to the Baptist Church, so I can’t know all the Baptist rules yet. Thus I am quoting my pastor who has been going with Jesus for much more years I did so far.

There are many authorities in this world, and many of them ‘could’ be wrong. Being a recognized authority does not mean that some are submitting to a true authority. Look at those you say are wrong, the oneness Pentecostals. They too submit to authorities and many of those authorities have been walking their faith for years and years…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I can ask you the very same question (Though I think I know already the answers. After 1100 posts here in CAF you know them by heart! ): LOL

How do you know the Catholic rules are the true rules over all other Churches

Last, what if your pastor/bishop/pope etc. studied the wrong theology?

Can this not also happen in the CC? If someone studies, or even simpler, just is a Catholic, that these people come up different truths? - Or why do you think the CC (especially in traditional Catholic countries that have been Catholic for 1000ends of years) is so watered down? That people simply don’t stick to the rules of their Church?

Why do you think and are even so sure about that that there needs to be one truth that is true for all? - Have a look around! What do you see? One truth that is true for all and to that all stick? - No, brother, I sadly don’t see that. The world, the moral, is on the contrary, going even more and more down!

You’re answering sincere questions with questions. That appears to be an avoidance of an honest discussion.

In 110AD St. Ignatius wrote about the ‘Catholic Church’. One can read the writings of the early Church fathers and see the same teachings of the Catholic Church today.

Your pastor is interpreting scriptures, that were in the sole possession of the Catholic Church for 1500 years. What made the reformers know interpretations better than the very
Church it go the Bible from?

Explain to me how many truths equal one truth? If I tell you 10 different truths, is it still truth? The Holy Spirit cannot lie.

 

[Esdra]

You’re answering sincere questions with questions. That appears to be an avoidance of an honest discussion.

In 110AD St. Ignatius wrote about the ‘Catholic Church’. One can read the writings of the early Church fathers and see the same teachings of the Catholic Church today.

Your pastor is interpreting scriptures, that were in the sole possession of the Catholic Church for 1500 years. What made the reformers know interpretations better than the very
Church it go the Bible from?

Explain to me how many truths equal one truth? If I tell you 10 different truths, is it still truth? The Holy Spirit cannot lie.

My dear friend,

I really like you. But this discussion is really too hard for me.
I don’t know - you are really VERY zealous in trying to catechise me.
I can’t answer you your questions just like that…
You always challenge me to take such hard discussions. If I remember correctly, that wasn’t the first time. Same with rinnie - in another thread I needed to tell her that she please shouldn’t start again with the discussion Catholic vs. Protestant. (She apparently, like you, loves so much.)
It’s really nothing against you personally (and of course also not against my “forum-mom” rinnie! .
I love you like my brother (who I don’t have! ) and you seem to be a really nice guy, but well…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

My dear friend,

I really like you. But this discussion is really too hard for me.
I don’t know - you are really VERY zealous in trying to catechise me.
I can’t answer you your questions just like that…
You always challenge me to take such hard discussions. If I remember correctly, that wasn’t the first time. Same with rinnie - in another thread I needed to tell her that she please shouldn’t start again with the discussion Catholic vs. Protestant. (She apparently, like you, loves so much.)
It’s really nothing against you personally (and of course also not against my “forum-mom” rinnie! .
I love you like my brother (who I don’t have! ) and you seem to be a really nice guy, but well…

It would be nice if I could catechize someone, but that’s not my intention. You challenge Catholic beliefs/teachings. I am only defending my faith.

If the questions are too hard, you need to ask them yourself. That’s the line of questioning that caused me to convert from Protestantism to Catholicism.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

My dear friend,

I really like you. But this discussion is really too hard for me.
I don’t know - you are really VERY zealous in trying to catechise me.
I can’t answer you your questions just like that…
You always challenge me to take such hard discussions. If I remember correctly, that wasn’t the first time. Same with rinnie - in another thread I needed to tell her that she please shouldn’t start again with the discussion Catholic vs. Protestant. (She apparently, like you, loves so much.)
It’s really nothing against you personally (and of course also not against my “forum-mom” rinnie! .
I love you like my brother (who I don’t have! ) and you seem to be a really nice guy, but well…

I wanted to let you know something personal. My brother is Baptist. When I try to discuss theology with him, he shuts down and says he doesn’t even want to talk about it. He also finds the questions too hard.

 

[Esdra]

I wanted to let you know something personal. My brother is Baptist. When I try to discuss theology with him, he shuts down and says he doesn’t even want to talk about it. He also finds the questions too hard.

Poor brother of you!
I can definitely understand him!

I think the difference is that you converted from Protestantism (I assume) to
Catholicism.
I actually wouldn’t even need to convert, as I am still Catholic, but revert.

But anyway. I see no reason why I should.
Tomorrow I have a meeting with the priest of our parish, I wrote him an Email and he invited me to discuss it personally. (The Email contained, what else? , faith questions.)
I am really curious what he has to say!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Poor brother of you!
I can definitely understand him!

I think the difference is that you converted from Protestantism (I assume) to
Catholicism.
I actually wouldn’t even need to convert, as I am still Catholic, but revert.

But anyway. I see no reason why I should.
Tomorrow I have a meeting with the priest of our parish, I wrote him an Email and he invited me to discuss it personally. (The Email contained, what else? , faith questions.)
I am really curious what he has to say!

Questions are an important part of discernment.

 

[Esdra]

Okay, before the Anabaptists who had the authority over the ‘trues rules’?

How do you know the Baptist rules are the true rules over all other Churches?

Last, what if your pastor studied the wrong theology? Or, what happens when you have say three different people study theology and they all come up with different truths?

I’d like to answer that because I got a brilliant idea!

God the Father - Prophets - Jesus - Apostles - Catholic Church - Martin Luther (as he was a monk) - Calvin/Zwingli (weren’t they not also clergy?) - Anabaptists (as far as I know one of the founders of the Anabaptists movement in Switzerland was a former Catholic priest) - Baptists - Pentecostals.

That’s the tree from where the authority is from!

And I listed only what you Catholics call “seperated brothers in Christ” not heresies or cults. (Did I speak with you, prodigal, about the German term “Sekte” and the English word “sect”, or was it someone else?)

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I’d like to answer that because I got a brilliant idea!

God the Father - Prophets - Jesus - Apostles - Catholic Church - Martin Luther (as he was a monk) - Calvin/Zwingli (weren’t they not also clergy?) - Anabaptists (as far as I know one of the founders of the Anabaptists movement in Switzerland was a former Catholic priest) - Baptists - Pentecostals.

That’s the tree from where the authority is from!

Sounds like students who figured they knew more than the teachers…

By the way, you realize you placed the Catholic Church in authority prior to the reformation?

But looking at the ‘connection’ you’re making we have to ask, 'why do they have different doctrines/teachings/beliefs? We’re back to the authority of who’s right? Sorry hehe

 

[Esdra]

Sounds like students who figured they knew more than the teachers…

By the way, you realize you placed the Catholic Church in authority prior to the reformation?

But looking at the ‘connection’ you’re making we have to ask, 'why do they have different doctrines/teachings/beliefs? We’re back to the authority of who’s right? Sorry hehe

Of course the Catholic Church is first!

Yes, students that study and come to a knowledge their teacher is not aware of. Isn’t there a saying, “A teacher is only a good teacher when his students know at the end of their studies more than himself?” or so?

Why do you think I only listed the trinitarian Churches and not also cults or other heresies like JWs or Oneness Pentecostals?
Because in their essentials ALL of those Churches in this tree (which is of course by far not complete, but I think one gets the idea!) are the same.
Now we are again at the essentials which aren’t scriptural as you keep saying!
Ever heard of the lowest common denominator?
Okay, I think we’ll soon start turning ourselves in circles!
Therefore I’ll go smoking now and then read what you’ve written!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Of course the Catholic Church is first!

Yes, students that study and come to a knowledge their teacher is not aware of. Isn’t there a saying, “A teacher is only a good teacher when his students know at the end of their studies more than himself?” or so?

Why do you think I only listed the trinitarian Churches and not also cults or other heresies like JWs or Oneness Pentecostals?
Because in their essentials ALL of those Churches in this tree (which is of course by far not complete, but I think one gets the idea!) are the same.
Now we are again at the essentials which aren’t scriptural as you keep saying!
Ever heard of the lowest common denominator?
Okay, I think we’ll soon start turning ourselves in circles!
Therefore I’ll go smoking now and then read what you’ve written!

Just like essentials, ‘lowest common denominator’ is not in scriptures. When you admit that ‘essentials’ is not in scriptures, you are placing belief in a ‘man made tradition’. It’s man made since it’s origin is new.

I thought Baptists were Bible only. At least that’s what I remember from my Protestant days. If it’s not in the Bible, it’s not to be believed…

 

[Esdra]

Just like essentials, ‘lowest common denominator’ is not in scriptures. When you admit that ‘essentials’ is not in scriptures, you are placing belief in a ‘man made tradition’. It’s man made since it’s origin is new.

I thought Baptists were Bible only. At least that’s what I remember from my Protestant days. If it’s not in the Bible, it’s not to be believed…

I don’t know if I wrote it in this thread or an other one: Baptists do believe in parts of what the Catholics call ST, 'though they’d never admit that. - In fact I think this is even true for all Protestants. - Some in a higher, some in a lower digree.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I don’t know if I wrote it in this thread or an other one: Baptists do believe in parts of what the Catholics call ST, 'though they’d never admit that. - In fact I think this is even true for all Protestants. - Some in a higher, some in a lower digree.

But a sacred tradition has roots back to the early Church fathers, which none that I know of wrote about ‘essentials’. That belief developed with the birth of many, many denominations.

 

[Esdra]

But a sacred tradition has roots back to the early Church fathers, which none that I know of wrote about ‘essentials’. That belief developed with the birth of many, many denominations.

True. But I think they are needed nevertheless. In my opinion Christianity has to stand together against many threats. - No matter which denomination, everyone’s called!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

True. But I think they are needed nevertheless. In my opinion Christianity has to stand together against many threats. - No matter which denomination, everyone’s called!

We should be unified. Jesus prayed for us to be perfectly one. Paul wrote for us to be perfectly one, of the same mind and judgment and to avoid division. But now we have to decide is ‘essentials’ perfectly one, of the same mind and judgment, or is that divisions?

 

[jmcrae]

I can ask you the very same question (Though I think I know already the answers. After 1100 posts here in CAF you know them by heart! ): LOL

How do you know the Catholic rules are the true rules over all other Churches?

Because Jesus gave it to Peter, and Peter is the first Catholic Pope. All of the rest of the Popes got their authority from Peter, and Peter got it from Jesus.

No Baptist ever got authority from Jesus - they made up their own church and their own rules. It is a man-made organization.

 

[jmcrae]

I’d like to answer that because I got a brilliant idea!

God the Father - Prophets - Jesus - Apostles - Catholic Church - Martin Luther (as he was a monk) - Calvin/Zwingli (weren’t they not also clergy?) - Anabaptists (as far as I know one of the founders of the Anabaptists movement in Switzerland was a former Catholic priest) - Baptists - Pentecostals.

That’s the tree from where the authority is from!

Well, except that all of those Catholic guys lost their authority when they broke away and quit from the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church never said to them, Okay, go with our blessing and start up all these new churches.

Not at all. So, they did not receive any authority from the Catholic Church to do or say any of what they did and said - it was all just themselves, with no authority from anybody whatsoever, just doing their own thing.

 

[jmcrae]

I mean, I also think that this babbling and rolling on the floor is a bit overexcited,
but mass has nothing to do with the gifts of the Holy Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12, has it?

You see my point?

The whole context of the first letter to the Corinthians is the Church at Corinth, and how the people were behaving at Mass.

St. Paul is reminding them that not everybody has to be the priest. Not everybody has to be the reader. Not everybody has to distribute the Holy Communion. Not everybody has to teach the Sunday School class. But each person has his or her own gifts, and we participate at Mass each in our own role, and each with our own gifts - those who can teach, do the teaching. Those who can serve do the serving. Those who are priests can be the priests. If your role is to stand in the pew and say the responses, this, too, is an important role at Mass. Everyone is needed. The body would be crippled, if anyone were missing, or if anyone were trying to do someone else’s job instead of their own.

 

[Protector]

Because Jesus gave it to Peter, and Peter is the first Catholic Pope. All of the rest of the Popes got their authority from Peter, and Peter got it from Jesus.

That is circular reasoning and very much dependent on the unknown, i.e.is it not a fact that there is no scriptual, or secular writing that proves that Peter was ever in Rome, and so could not have been the Bishop of Rome? I so dearly wish that there was, but there you are. Please tell me that I’m wrong.

Protector.

 

[mwok]

That is circular reasoning and very much dependent on the unknown, i.e.is it not a fact that there is no scriptual, or secular writing that proves that Peter was ever in Rome, and so could not have been the Bishop of Rome? I so dearly wish that there was, but there you are. Please tell me that I’m wrong.

Protector.

Matthew also issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church

But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the succession of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that the church that has the tradition and the faith that comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church {of Rome}, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic Tradition. {St. Irenaeus of Lyons Against Heresies, 3:1:1circa A.D. 189}

St. Irenaeus of Lyons was the second bishop of Lyons in what is now France.

"In this chair in which he himself had sat, Peter in mighty Rome commanded Linus, the first elected, to sit down. After him, Cletus too accepted the flock of the fold. As his successor, Anacletus was elected by lot. Clement follows him, well-known to apostolic men. After him Evaristus ruled the flock without crime. Alexander, sixth in succession, commends the fold to Sixtus. After his illustrious times were completed, he passed it on to Telesphorus. He was excellent, a faithful martyr . . . " (Poem Against the Marcionites 276–284 [A.D. 267]).

I think this is a secular source but I’m not sure.