where is the historical church founded by Jesus Christ?

[larkin31]

Douay Rheim

Luke

26 And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God

This woman, perfected and “full” of God’s “grace” is–as it states–“troubled”?

But thanks for the citation. I don’t see this as sinless perfection at all, but rather a troubled human in communion with God.

 

[elvisman]

Which of the NT writers or disciples were martyred for believing transubstanciation? I’ve never seen that in the Bible.

So - because it’s not in the bible makes it untrue? That is the weakest argument I’ve ever read on these forums.

Was the story of the Mayflower Pilgrims in the Bible? Nope
Does that make it a lie?
Get real.

I doubt anyone was put to death for believing the bread became Human flesh and the wine became Human Blood. They may have been laughed at by those who did not understand the idea of Communion, but martyred, I highly doubt it. They were martyred for believing in Jesus and preaching Him to be God, died for sins and raised from the dead.

Then you are completely ignorant of history - among other things.
The writings of Flavius Josephus, Pliny and other ancient historians speak of the martyrdom of Early Christians for their belief in the Eucharist. They were considered cannibals for their beliefs. don’t believe me? Look it up.

Crack open a history book or anything other than what was written by Lorraine Boettner or Alexander Hislop.
It is a matter of HISTORY - not Scripture that people were martyred in the name of Christ beyond the 1st Century. It does NOT have to be in Scripture for it to have happened. Using YOUR ridiculous logic stick - NOTHING has happened in the last 2000 years because it’s not in the Bible.

**Do you also reject that the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812 happened because the is no Scriptural proof?
**This is beyond ludicrous . . . **

Jesus told us what the purpose of Communion was: ‘in remembrance of Me.’ The means it was metaphorical.

Oh, REALLY? That’s not what the Early Church taught.
And, that’s NOT what it says in John 6.

 

[adrift]

I am not confused or lying, how rude of you I changed affiliation because of people like you. I am what I say i am. As far as ideas you have not presented one to me that was worth much. My belief in Jesus is very simple, the way He meant it to be. I am very glad I am a simple person and I do know the truth.

pot calling the kettle black.:bowdown2:

You changed affiliations can only be blamed on you. You should take responsibility for your own actions.

 

[larkin31]

Disagreement and debate do not equate to heterodoxy. When one departs from the Apostolic teaching one is no longer Catholic.

In any single matter? Are you an absolutist in this regard?

 

[guanophore]

Yes so its not hard to imagine that after 1500 years it might be a good idea to get back the the original documents and see what may have evolved.

Yes, this is good for all of us to do. Reading the Early Church Fathers is what got me back into the Church after many years of sojourn in Protestant communities. To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.

Or you see how He gave us the books of the Bible so we could return to them as the Israelites did.  How many times through different kings they let the people drift from the truth and then they were brought back to the scriptures. even at times bing divided do to unfaithfulness.   these things happened to them as examples for us.

Indeed, the Scriptures are as sure guide. Reading them in spearation from the Sacred Tradition that produced them, however, is a recipe for division and error.

A 1500 year old banquet might have a few items that need tossing

This is an excellent observation. The banquet instituted by Christ is new every morning, where that embraced by the Reformers really does need to be tossed.

Glad you see the pattern in the old testament.   Now , How faithful were they to Gods instructions over 1500 years?    What did God do about it?   Dont think it could happen to Christs church?   He threatened to take the spirit away from one of the churches in Revelation.  Does God make empty threats?

The promises are made the the Church. those that are not in unity with the Church do not benefit from the promises. The Light is in the Lampstand.Those who stay with the Light will remain in Christ. The consequences given in Rev. are not for the Holy and undefiled Church, but the fallible and sinful members of her. Men are always in need of reform.

The difference with Israel is that Jesus promised to protect and preserve His Church. Therefore, though individuals may fail to remain in her, she will be undefiled.

God used one man in on many occasions to bring His people back to the scriptures.  besides Luther, the Bible was beginning to be mass produced at that time and was available to more people.

Yes, indeed, the printing press, invented by a Catholic, was initiated by a printing of the most important book in Catholicism, the Bible. The Church then made arrangements to mass produce the scriptures. None of this was the work of Luther.

Luther took it upon himself to create his own translation, remove some books, change some language, and publish it in defiance against the Church by whom it had been created and preserved for 1500 years.

 

[adrift]

Sure am glad that I am here , if not who would you have to bash? But I count every bash as a blessing so keep up the good work. I am sure God has blessings in store for all the bashers.

Your bashing is a blessing to us all here. Keep it up:thumbsup: God will judge us and I think you will be surprised that your judgement is not His. Don’t forget to count yourself among the bashers.

 

[elvisman]

Don’t be to hard on Tweety. I doubt if she could even tell you what an indulgence is. .She is probably confusing a stipend for Mass for an indulgence. She is quite unfamiliar with anything out of the scope of her limited bible study and she has no desire to learn anything new.

Perhaps, you have a point - but she has repeatedly attacked the Church on these forums and is not as innocent as you might claim.**

 

[guanophore]

I have read on another thread some quotes from Popes that seem to contradict these paragraphs. which has more authority? Or am I missunderstanding one of them?

Church teaching cannot contradict itself. It it appears to do so, then it is likely that the reader does not understand it.

 

[elvisman]

Elvis you say no then yes then no. Either you believe they are part of the body of Christ or not or perhaps you haven’t decided yet.

I have repeatedly told you but you refuse to listen, my nominally Catholic friend.

One last time:
**They are related to the Body in that they have divorced themselves from the Body (the Church). **
They are not, however, abandoned by the Body, which is why we refer to them as "Separated brethren."

 

[elvisman]

How dare you call me a liar. Were you there? You may think you know everything but trust me you don’t know squat. You are very rude and I really can’t say what I would like to.

This is a practice that is condemned by the Church - not merely frowned upon but condemned.

If you don’t want to be thought of as a liar - then don’t lie.

PS - it is not rudeness to ask a person to stop lying.

 

[CMatt25]

Like I said - they are related to the Body in that they have divorced themselves from the Body (the Church).
They are not, however, abandoned by the Body, which is why we refer to them as “Separated brethren.”

Ok Elvis then if they are related, my brother just say already **YES ** they are in the body for goodness sake.

 

[Michael_Vernon]

To address the actual topic of this thread, i think the Biblical answer is that the historical Church founded by Jesus Christ is the Church that is founded upon the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the Chief Cornerstone. The question then becomes, Where are the teachings of Jesus and the Prophets and Apostles most clearly, purely, and effectively promulgated? That church is the Catholic Church in the original meaning of the name “catholic”. In some places that may be where only two or three are gathered together in His Name.

When talking about the true Church being both the Body and Bride of Christ, i think it may be helpful to remember that Christ is the Second Adam. Eve, the bride of the first Adam was flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones, taken from his side. So the Church, the Bride of the Second Adam is flesh of His Flesh, bone of His Bones, taken from His Side.

With regard to the sinlessness of Mary the Mother of Christ, I would urge my Catholic brothers and sisters to exercise patience and restraint toward our Protestant brothers and sisters for whom the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary may be very difficult to digest, since that may be strong meat and not the pure milk of the Word that our weaker (not meant to be a demeaning term) brothers and sisters need for succor to grow in Grace and Truth. Is that OK?

 

[Loboto-Me]

This woman, perfected and “full” of God’s “grace” is–as it states–“troubled”?

But thanks for the citation. I don’t see this as sinless perfection at all, but rather a troubled human in communion with God.

If you’re a virgin who’s promised in mariage and suddenly you’re told that you’re going to be pregnant, wouldn’t you be troubled? Wouldn’t you wonder how is that going to happen? What will people say? I’m a VIRGIN! How could that be?

Now THAT’s “troubled”.

So the angel, in order to remove Mary’s anxiety goes on to say more… which is that the the Holy Spirit will come upon her and give her this child.

 

[elvisman]

Ok Elvis then if they are related, my brother just say already **YES **they are in the body for goodness sake.

Anybody who is outside the visible Body of Christ - the CATHOLIC CHURCH - is outside of the Body of Christ.

They ARE, however related to the Body, just as anybrother or sister who disowns you.

Is that clear enough or do you require further instruction on the matter?

 

[Loboto-Me]

To address the actual topic of this thread, i think the Biblical answer is that the historical Church founded by Jesus Christ is the Church that is founded upon the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the Chief Cornerstone. The question then becomes, Where are the teachings of Jesus and the Prophets and Apostles most clearly, purely, and effectively promulgated? That church is the Catholic Church in the original meaning of the name “catholic”. In some places that may be where only two or three are gathered together in His Name.

When talking about the true Church being both the Body and Bride of Christ, i think it may be helpful to remember that Christ is the Second Adam. Eve, the bride of the first Adam was flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones, taken from his side. So the Church, the Bride of the Second Adam is flesh of His Flesh, bone of His Bones, taken from His Side.

With regard to the sinlessness of Mary the Mother of Christ, I would urge my Catholic brothers and sisters to exercise patience and restraint toward our Protestant brothers and sisters for whom the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary may be very difficult to digest, since that may be strong meat and not the pure milk of the Word that our weaker (not meant to be a demeaning term) brothers and sisters need for succor to grow in Grace and Truth. Is that OK?

That is well thought out and said so yes… That’s OK

 

[CMatt25]

**This is a practice that is condemned **by the Church - not merely frowned upon but condemned.

If you don’t want to be thought of as a liar - then don’t lie.

PS - it is not rudeness to ask a person to stop lying.

I’ve known Catholics who have not believed people when a priest may have done something condemned. But I have no reason to call them liars.

 

[adrift]

Jesus used this form of teaching regularly in speaking of Himself. He called Himself a Door, a Vine, etc. In the NT He’s called the Rock, the Lion of the Tribe of Juda, the Lamb that was slain before the world began. They are to be understood in another sense than literal. He is a kind of Door, a kind of Vine, etc. We eat His Body and Drink of His Blood in a symbolic way.​

I asked before and I don’t remember seeing any answer to my question. I’d think if the Eucharist is really the Presence of Jesus, which is Holy beyond conprehension and the Ark of the Covenant with the Mercy Seat on top which was a symbol of His Presence AND Uzzah was struck down for touching a symbol, why aren’t more struck down when they take the Body and Blood of Jesus (His real Presense as you say) in an unholy manner? Getting sick or weak isn’t the answer, IMO. Just ask Uzzah.

Thank you for the definition. I am sure Tweetymom will appreciate not having to look it up. I never said that Jesus did not ever speak figuratively. But He didn’t always speak figuratively. His disciples did not leave Him when He said He was a door, a vine etc. But when He said that they would eat His Body they left Him and He did nothing to stop them. That is because they knew His true meaning and it was too hard. Jesus didn’t correct them either because they understood Him.

One difference that I can see between the Ark and Jesus is that they were told not to touch the Ark and we are told to touch “Take and eat” . I am too lazy to look up the passage and quote it directly but the Scripture says you bring down condemnation on you if you receive Communion unworthily.

 

[CMatt25]

Anybody who is outside the visible Body of Christ - the CATHOLIC CHURCH - is outside of the Body of Christ.

They ARE, however related to the Body, just as anybrother or sister who disowns you.

Is that clear enough or do you require further instruction on the matter?

Apparently I do not from you You can’t seem to understand in your scenerio that a brother or sister is still part of your family.

 

[guanophore]

"Does Christ want a smaller church? Then he answered, “I don’t think so.”

And if the Pope wants purity and people are forced to leave if they can’t be 100% pure, then he gets a smaller church, doesn’t he?

One must make a distinction between purity of doctrine (the faith) and moral purity. A person can espouse purity of faith yet fall short in practice. The Pope is saying that the church will be more pure if those in it actualy adhere to it’s teachings. If all cafeteria Catholics realized that they are really no longer Catholic, but Protestant, then the Church would be much smaller. They would stop calling themselves Catholic when they reject the Catholic faith. In fact, the Catholic Church is not nearly as large as all those who are baptized and labeled Catholic, because the majority of them reject the doctrines of the faith. Christ wants purity of faith, which is the narrow way, not the wide and easy. Few people find it, according to Him.

 

[guanophore]

I’m almost certain Doki was saying we don’t take plucking our eyes out literally. Lots of things in Scripture you don’t take literally.

This is one of the most important functions of Sacred Tradition. It tells us how to understand the scriptures that were produced by it. It tells us which passages are to be taken literally, and all the levels of metaphor within them.