Who says one organization today is "The True Church"

  • Thread starter Thread starter AmateurPianist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AmateurPianist said:
Now I: respect you for holding the Early Church Fathers in high regard. Their opinion should carry a lot of weight.

However I do notice that the opinion of the Early Church Fathers is not the same as God chiming in on the matter.

And I hate to say this…but you using the logic "The earliest church called themselves the Catholic church, therefore the Catholic church is the one true church…is akin to saying the name on the door as the governing metric.

Which would be great if there were a verse in the Bible that says you will know the one true church because it keeps the same name from the beginning…or something like that.

But I know of no such verse.
Click to expand...
Well to reference the bible for confirmation, then let it be known to you that the Catholic Church is the only body of believers that Canonized the bible as we have it today since the fourth century for her “Catholic” “Universal” Liturgies for all peoples everywhere.

If you are going to hold the bible to authority, then you are recognizing the Catholic Church’s authenticity of her God given authority (see Matt.16 about the keys) to canonize the bible whether or not you accept this fact or not. Any biblical scholar can confirm this fact that the Catholic Church canonized the bible, both from Catholic and non catholic circles.

The Early Church Fathers believe and practiced their Catholic faith the same as we Catholics believe and practice today. Their teachings and writings are very Catholic to today.
 
AmateurPianist said:
Now I: respect you for holding the Early Church Fathers in high regard. Their opinion should carry a lot of weight.

However I do notice that the opinion of the Early Church Fathers is not the same as God chiming in on the matter.

And I hate to say this…but you using the logic "The earliest church called themselves the Catholic church, therefore the Catholic church is the one true church…is akin to saying the name on the door as the governing metric.

Which would be great if there were a verse in the Bible that says you will know the one true church because it keeps the same name from the beginning…or something like that.

But I know of no such verse.
Click to expand...
ahh my friend. but beyond the earliest Church fathers calling themselves Catholic, you can trace this one Church all the way back to Jesus Christ and his apostles. again it is a historical fact. this Church is still with us today. so yes, God really has set his seal of approval on it, for Christ said, on this rock i shall build my Church. and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail against it. also… i will never leave you nor forsake you. and lo, i am with you, even until the end of the age. forgive the paraphrasing plz. Peace be to you. 🙂
 
benidict said:
ahh my friend. but beyond the earliest Church fathers calling themselves Catholic, you can trace this one Church all the way back to Jesus Christ and his apostles. again it is a historical fact. this Church is still with us today. so yes, God really has set his seal of approval on it, for Christ said, on this rock i shall build my Church. and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail against it. also… i will never leave you nor forsake you. and lo, i am with you, even until the end of the age. forgive the paraphrasing plz. Peace be to you. 🙂
Click to expand...
OK.

Now you are making two assumptions:
(1) That whenever you see two or more organizations that claim to be at least a subset of ‘the church’ when formerly there were one, that one and only one of these organizations can really be the church.
(2) The governing metric to identify this church is “lineage” (it formerly was “name on the door”).

I admit a governing metric of “lineage” sounds better than a governing metric of “name on the door”.

Now I still don’t get where God says (as opposed to some opinions of man or some Bible interpretations of man) where I should make these assumptions. But still a metric of lineage intuitively seems to be an improvement of a metric of name on the door.

One problem with “lineage” though it does not uniquely identify one organization. I know of three claims (Catholic, Orthodox, Trail of Blood) that claim to be the one true church through the metric of lineage…well the Trail of Blood claim using this metric is sketchy…and perhaps it really is another metric I dunno. But it still is not unique.
 
Monte1945 said:
I don’t think there is one true chruch from what the scriptures say:

" And I have sheep from another fold, and they hear my voice and come unto me".

“do not stop them, for he who is not against us is for us”…

When I say not one true church… I mean not one church which has the
truth of God within it…

Pesonally I belong to three different christian denomimations at the same time.
And I have no problem with it… many others in my family do but I don’t.

I belong to the Independant Baptist church
to the Pentecostal and to the Roman Catholic…

I three different perspectivies from each church… and it all goes to making
me a better christian…

I love the Baptist way of preaching using all those great bible references
in making their points… Every now and then I really need one of those
hell and fire brimstone sermons… One of the main basic sermon styles
of the Baptist preacher… is through his sermon to put one into the pit
of fire and then to pull him out with the shed blood of Jesus the savior.
It can do wonders for one’s spiritual build up…

I love and appreciate the emotional expressions of the Pentecostal for thier
reaction of the love of God in their lives… and those songs… there isn’t any
other singing and praising the lord as they can give … It has always been
a celebration of God’s love for me. I have always come out from those meetings
with a deeper sense of the joy of God within us…
It is a great witness to worship and devotions they show when they knee
and pray out loud at the same time… no pride or stiff necks there…

and the Catholic faith with her wonderful gifts of the Sacraments…
The direct channels to God’s Graces… and the Eucharist … The presentence
of God literally… among us… and in his redemptive role which is for ever and ever.
and we gather together as a community/family and we through seven prayers
during the mass where we pray in repentance for our sins… and lay them at the foot
of the Cross where Christ is during the Mass… then receive that same Host in order
to stay connected to the vine as the branches we are…and grow in His Grace for our own vocation He desires for us to fulfill.

And the sights and sounds and smells of the Mass through it’s robed priests,
the candles and incense… is an actual vision of the Heavens which John saw
in his visions recorded in the book of Revelation of Jesus… What a wonderful
picture that gives one’s faith.

As long as a chruch proclaims Jesus as the Christ and presents him crucified
and ressurrected for our sins… it is one of the true churches which is the
Kingdom Of God here and now actually living in and amoung us and shines to the whole world through our love for one another… It is the true church!!!

that is my opinion…
Click to expand...
Thank you for your opinion. It is exactly mine. I do have a favorite among the three.
 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a person baptized and practicing Catholic going to (in addition to services at his/her own Church as required) another non-Catholic Church as well, and in enjoying say the music at one, or the fellowship of family and friends at another.

The problem is that no baptized and practicing Catholic can simultaneously call himself/herself a ‘member’ of a Catholic Church AND of a non-Catholic church.

You can’t register as a member of St. Jude’s Catholic, AND of First Baptist, AND of the local non-denom, and consider yourself to be ‘all three’.

To claim one can (as Monte did) is erroneous. (Note that I particularly mention the word ‘register’. Again, if I (a Catholic), were registered in my home parish, but regularly went to First Baptist and the local non-denom in addition, but did not register as a member in those churches and did not call myself a member, I’d be fine. Visiting nonCatholic churches, even regular attendance in addition to one’s attendance at Catholic services, is just fine. “Joining” a nonCatholic church by registering or claiming membership in that church, in addition to being a registered baptized Catholic, is wrong.
 
Far be it for me to judge, but how in the world can you claim** 3** different faiths? They all contradict each other! Sola Scriptura vs Bible and Tradition, Sola Fide vs. Faith and Works. Immersion vs. any other form of Baptism.

Do you really believe that Christ and God are up in heaven arguing about what is the correct doctrine?! Do you really believe that you find the wholeness of truth while visiting three distinct faiths? Three distinct faiths that differ so much it’s sickening to hear the battle of words between them. Thinking to find the truth among all three, while never actually taking a stance on what side you are on, is not going to work.

This is the problem with the Christian faith as it sits among the world. Unless united, we will suffer greatly. Picking and choosing what you want is not the correct way, I am sorry.

Show me one single verse in the Bible where Christ says “You can have it your way”
 
Tantum_ergo said:
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a person baptized and practicing Catholic going to (in addition to services at his/her own Church as required) another non-Catholic Church as well, and in enjoying say the music at one, or the fellowship of family and friends at another.

The problem is that no baptized and practicing Catholic can simultaneously call himself/herself a ‘member’ of a Catholic Church AND of a non-Catholic church.

You can’t register as a member of St. Jude’s Catholic, AND of First Baptist, AND of the local non-denom, and consider yourself to be ‘all three’.

To claim one can (as Monte did) is erroneous. (Note that I particularly mention the word ‘register’. Again, if I (a Catholic), were registered in my home parish, but regularly went to First Baptist and the local non-denom in addition, but did not register as a member in those churches and did not call myself a member, I’d be fine. Visiting nonCatholic churches, even regular attendance in addition to one’s attendance at Catholic services, is just fine. “Joining” a nonCatholic church by registering or claiming membership in that church, in addition to being a registered baptized Catholic, is wrong.
Click to expand...
👍
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
Also, you said that in your opinion God didn’t tell Joseph Smith to start a new Church.

Who did he tell?
Click to expand...
I can not pretend to speak for God. If God chimes in on this thread then we can all know for sure, can’t we.

If I want to speculate, I might speculate that God did tell the folks who started my local church some 30-35 years ago to do so. I am only speculating in this instance because I know my local church. I refuse to speculate in any instances I have no personal knowledge of.
 
AmateurPianist said:
I would consider any common beliefs between Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant (well most traditional Protestant anyway) would be safely orthodox.
Click to expand...
There are a wide variety of conflicting beliefs among protestants. How can these crucial issues be left in doubt?

For example:

Is baptism required for salvation?
Is infant baptism valid?
Is a person once saved always saved?
Are the gifts of the spirit necessary to confirm salvation?
Can sin separate us from God?
Is it necessary to honor the Sabbath?
etc.
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
There are a wide variety of conflicting beliefs among protestants. How can these crucial issues be left in doubt?

For example:

Is baptism required for salvation?
Is infant baptism valid?
Is a person once saved always saved?
Are the gifts of the spirit necessary to confirm salvation?
Can sin separate us from God?
Is it necessary to honor the Sabbath?
etc.
Click to expand...
Then I wouldn’t call these issues safely orthodox since they are still contested to some extent.

I don’t get where you are going with this.

I for one am not going to defend Christian organizations in competition with each other with mutually exclusive dogmas because I for one do not believe this is what Jesus had in mind when He designed the church.
 
AmateurPianist said:
Then I wouldn’t call these issues safely orthodox since they are still contested to some extent.

I don’t get where you are going with this.

I for one am not going to defend Christian organizations in competition with each other with mutually exclusive dogmas because I for one do not believe this is what Jesus had in mind when He designed the church.
Click to expand...
These issues are settled in the Church.

I believe that the fullness of Truth is available in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

My point is that protestantism cannot contain the fullness of Truth because there are so many conflicting doctrines on very crucial points.
 
AmateurPianist said:
Then I wouldn’t call these issues safely orthodox since they are still contested to some extent.

I don’t get where you are going with this.

I for one am not going to defend Christian organizations in competition with each other with mutually exclusive dogmas because I for one do not believe this is what Jesus had in mind when He designed the church.
Click to expand...
Amen to that.
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
There are a wide variety of conflicting beliefs among protestants. How can these crucial issues be left in doubt?

For example:

Is baptism required for salvation?
Is infant baptism valid?
Is a person once saved always saved?
Are the gifts of the spirit necessary to confirm salvation?
Can sin separate us from God?
Is it necessary to honor the Sabbath?
etc.
Click to expand...
 
I am new to this site but I’m glad that I found it. Over the past few months God has opened my eyes to so many things as I have opened my heart to accept him as a true Catholic. The more I read the scriptures and study my faith the more I am proud to profess it. I have had the opportunity to attend my gf’s church which is protestant/pentecostal, on many occassions. I respect her faith and others like her, they are good Christians too but I believe the Catholic Church has sound doctrine. I support and respect my faith because the teachers are infallible and true, not the made up theologys of some pastor with a certificate in theology. I don’'t just accept anything that people say whether they profess to be men or women of God. I search the scriptures. Many protestant churches have a form of godliness but they deny his authority. Having attended many Pentecostal services my heart is always troubled. People worshipping the pastor, sucking up every word they say without searching the scriptures, exalting the holy spirit as he it was not apart of the trinity but a manifestation of their own conjuration and the list goes on. Like Father Damen said more than a century ago, when God says something, he wants it to be believed. Sound doctrine is what separates the Catholic Church my friends. While others wrestle with the scriptures, the Catholic Church teaches the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top