WHY do you [if you do?] think the RCC is not the One true Church founded by Christ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There are many reasons. The biggest reason is that Jesus’ message was a message of Tawheed. The Catholic Church teaches a Trinitarian message, which is contrary to Tawheed. Tawheed is the belief that God is a single divine person with no partners. Catholicism denies Tawheed, so I choose to reject their claims.
 
Dear friend in Christ;

If you hold to the position that the RCC is NOT the one true Chuch founded and desired by Christ, please explain why this is?

God Bless you

Patrick
I am glad that you put RCC in your question, not just ‘catholic church’. I believe that Christ founded the Catholic Church, and that the Roman CC is part of that catholic church, as are the various orthodox churches. They are all equal.
 
I believe that Christ founded the Catholic Church, and that the Roman CC is part of that catholic church, as are the various orthodox churches. They are all equal.
How can they be equal if they believe different things? The Orthodox do not accept the infallibility of the Pope. The Orthodox accept divorce and artificial birth control under certain conditions. Also, they do not accept the filioque.
 
I think the RCC is not the one true Church because I reject the idea that the Pope has a universal jurisdiction, ability to define doctrine without council that is binding for the church and has a general universal supremacy.

The one true Church can be found in the local church as well as the universal church.
I have great respect and admiration for the Greek Orthodox Church.
However, I am Catholic instead of Orthodox in part because I don’t see how a Church which is no longer able to even hold new councils can be the full-functioning organism Jesus founded.
 
If there is a common and true Eucharist, then why inter-communion only under certain circumstances?
Because there is still schism, I guess. The two sides may have different degrees of what is permissible. I think the Catholic is more open than the Orthodox, if I’m not mistaken.
 
How can they be equal if they believe different things? The Orthodox do not accept the infallibility of the Pope. The Orthodox accept divorce and artificial birth control under certain conditions. Also, they do not accept the filioque.
Can the Orthodox even have such united doctrines? Do they hold Councils to determine Universal agreements over issues, such as Birth Control and divorce? If each diocese, or Church has its own liberty to take its own stance on these, then is there any stance made by the Orthodox council?
 
Dear friend in Christ;

If you hold to the position that the RCC is NOT the one true Chuch founded and desired by Christ, please explain why this is?

God Bless you

Patrick
Pope Adrian VI himself in 1522 said that the Catholic Church was corrupt.

“We know well that for many years things deserving abhorrence have gathered round the Holy See. Sacred things have been misused, ordinances transgressed, so that in everything there has been a change for the worse.” (Pastor, History of the Popes, 14:134, as quoted in Durant and Durant, The Age of Faith, 381)
 
🙂 Sorry, but that is illogical because:

There is but One True God

Who can and does have just One TRUE set of Faith beliefs [see Eph 4:4-7]

And founded, DESIRED, and protects fuuly only His RCC’s [PLEASE see my Post #13]👍

GBY
I don’t think “illogical” is the word you want. You’re working backwards to reconcile “RCC is the one true Church founded by Christ” with the premise “there is but one true God and one True faith” rather than the latter logically necessitating the former.

I’m noticing you didn’t feel your quotes stood on their own without parenthetical remarks (i.e. insertions of things they don’t explicitly say) added.

There being an objective truth necessitates that only one understanding can be correct, but it does not necessitate that your understanding is correct, or that any currently held understanding is completely correct.

See blind men and the elephant. The elephant doesn’t become less real because they disagree, nor does the objective “truth” about it change. Nor are their beliefs false, but none contains exclusively the “truth” about the elephant. Also disagreement does not diminish that there is a correct “faith” about the elephant, which would be that which most closely tells the truth about the objective reality.
 
The one true church is the universal church of all believers. The alternative to this view is a sort of theological elitism whereby we all say our church is the “true” church and all others are not churches at all. Which is a divisive and unreasonable attitude. All Christians are part of the one true church of God.
The Eastern Orthodox would disagree with you.
The Eastern Orthodox say that they are the one, true Church, because they have not changed the original Nicene Creed which did not contain the filioque clause.
Oversimplification. Yes, the Orthodox do say that they are the One True Church, and that Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans etc are not. But they don’t say that solely because of the filioque.
 
If there is a common and true Eucharist, then why inter-communion only under certain circumstances?
See the Antiochian response to the Melkite Initiative …

In October, 1996 the Holy Synod of the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate issued a statement which included these concerns on the Melkite proposal:

"In this regard, our Church questions the unity of faith which the Melkite Catholics think has become possible. Our Church believes that the discussion of this unity with Rome is still in its primitive stage. The first step toward unity on the doctrinal level, is not to consider as ecumenical, the Western local councils which the Church of Rome, convened, separately, including the First Vatican Council.

“And second the Melkite Catholics should not be obligated to accept such councils. Regarding inter- communion now, our Synod believes that inter-communion cannot be separated from the unity of faith. Moreover, inter-communion is the last step in the quest for unity and not the first.”

In a letter to the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, Metropolitan Philip also said:

“Please be advised that, while we pray for unity among all Christians, we cannot and will not enter into communion with non-Orthodox until we first achieve the unity of faith. As long as this unity of faith is not realized, there cannot be intercommunion. We ask you to adhere to the instructions which you receive from our office and hierarchs.”
 
The one true church is the universal church of all believers. The alternative to this view is a sort of theological elitism whereby we all say our church is the “true” church and all others are not churches at all. Which is a divisive and unreasonable attitude. All Christians are part of the one true church of God.
REPLY to what I highlighted on your POST

So exactly WHAT does it mean to be a “believer?” Does one actually have to believe everything Christ taught?

GBY

Patrick
 
It does not answer the question of the change in the creed by way of addition of the filioque. Further, according to some Eastern Orthodox, AFAIK, every bishop is a successor of Peter, not just the bishop of Rome. And since Peter was first at Antioch, and only later at Rome, the see of Antioch should take primacy over the Roman See. Many will ask if the Roman See was recognized in 1054 as the primary See, then why did all the other sees, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria stay in communion with the excommunicated Patriarch of Constantinople and not follow the Roman See?
Interesting and excellent response:) THANKS

Mt 10: 1-8

[1] And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. [2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not"

I have for a very long time been fascinated by the FACT that nowhere in the NT is their a disagreement or debate about who Christ [GOD} placed in charge.🙂

Early Church Fathers Primacy of Peter/Rome

**http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_primacy_of_rome.htm

The Early Church Fathers understood from the beginning that Peter and his successors held a place of primacy in the Church.

Clement of Rome
Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1[A.D. 95]).

Ignatius of Antioch
You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]).

Irenaeus
In his famous work Against the Heresies Irenaeus–the saintly Bishop of Lyon wrote about all the different little groups who made claims to authenticity and gave them a sure fire way of knowing the truth. Writing in about the year 125 he says,
“It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190

Irenaeus
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 successions 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 church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, 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 (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).

Clement of Alexandria
[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? “Behold, we have left all and have followed you” [Matt. 19:2 7, Mark 10:28] (Who is the Rich Man That is Saved? 21:3-5 [A.D. 200]).

Tertullian
[T]he Lord said to Peter, “On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven” [Matt. 16:18-19]. … Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loose and, not what they shall have or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).

Letter of Clement to James
Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D, 221]).

MORE ON THE SITE

THIS OUGHT NOT BE SURPRISING BECAUSE IT ONLY FOLLOWS THE OT EXAMPLE OF ALWAYS CHOOSING JUST ONE MAN TO LEAD

Noah, Abram, Moses, the Judges, Kings and Prophets, the last of which was John the Baptizer who LEAD to Jesus, wjo freely CHOOSE Peter:thumbsup:

God Bless you Brother

Patrick
 
[1] Is it possible there are any true believers NOT found in the One true Church founded by Christ?

[2] Is it possible there are any unbelievers found in the One true Church founded by Christ?
Answers
[1] NOT in the precise manner you asked. WHY?

Because to be a “True Believer” can only mean to Know and ACCEPT ALL that Jesus /God taught and desired that ALL “believers” accept and live.

**Mt 28:18-20 **

"[18] And Jesus coming, spoke TO THEM, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore,** TEACH YOU ALL nations**; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching** them to observe all things **whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the worlD

Note please the singular tense words chosen by Christ:thumbsup:

DOUAY BIBLE EXPLANATION OF VERSE #18
[18] All power: See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14.

Jn 17:17-20
[17] SANCTIFY THEM IN [MY] TRUTH. Thy word is truth. [18] As thou hast sent me into the world,I ALSO HAVE SENT THEM into the world. [19] And FOR THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] **And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me; **

[2] UNDOUBTEDLY YES!

But what dear friend does that have to do with your #1?

God Bless you

Patrick
 
I am glad that you put RCC in your question, not just ‘catholic church’. I believe that Christ founded the Catholic Church, and that the Roman CC is part of that catholic church, as are the various orthodox churches. They are all equal.
THANKS, but NO not QUITE

IF what you clain was true, then we’d be reconciled before this New Year:thumbsup:
 
Interesting and excellent response:) THANKS

Mt 10: 1-8

[1] And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. [2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not"

I have for a very long time been fascinated by the FACT that nowhere in the NT is their a disagreement or debate about who Christ [GOD} placed in charge.🙂

Early Church Fathers Primacy of Peter/Rome

**http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_primacy_of_rome.htm
The Early Church Fathers understood from the beginning that Peter and his successors held a place of primacy in the Church.

Clement of Rome
Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1[A.D. 95]).

Ignatius of Antioch
You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]).

Irenaeus
In his famous work Against the Heresies Irenaeus–the saintly Bishop of Lyon wrote about all the different little groups who made claims to authenticity and gave them a sure fire way of knowing the truth. Writing in about the year 125 he says,
“It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190

Irenaeus
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 successions 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 church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, 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 (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).

Clement of Alexandria
[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? “Behold, we have left all and have followed you” [Matt. 19:2 7, Mark 10:28] (Who is the Rich Man That is Saved? 21:3-5 [A.D. 200]).

Tertullian
[T]he Lord said to Peter, “On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven” [Matt. 16:18-19]. … Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loose and, not what they shall have or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).

Letter of Clement to James
Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D, 221]).

MORE ON THE SITE

THIS OUGHT NOT BE SURPRISING BECAUSE IT ONLY FOLLOWS THE OT EXAMPLE OF ALWAYS CHOOSING JUST ONE MAN TO LEAD

Noah, Abram, Moses, the Judges, Kings and Prophets, the last of which was John the Baptizer who LEAD to Jesus, wjo freely CHOOSE Peter:thumbsup:

God Bless you Brother

Patrick

All you continuously show is that indeed you have faith in the RCC’s interpretation of Matthew and other Scripture and in the ECFs and in the RCC’s interpretation of their words. Without such faith however, nothing is actually proven.
 
I don’t think “illogical” is the word you want. You’re working backwards to reconcile “RCC is the one true Church founded by Christ” with the premise “there is but one true God and one True faith” rather than the latter logically necessitating the former.

I’m noticing you didn’t feel your quotes stood on their own without parenthetical remarks (i.e. insertions of things they don’t explicitly say) added.

There being an objective truth necessitates that only one understanding can be correct, but it does not necessitate that your understanding is correct, or that any currently held understanding is completely correct.

See blind men and the elephant. The elephant doesn’t become less real because they disagree, nor does the objective “truth” about it change. Nor are their beliefs false, but none contains exclusively the “truth” about the elephant. Also disagreement does not diminish that there is a correct “faith” about the elephant, which would be that which most closely tells the truth about the objective reality.
I agree in principle about the reality of an Objective truth:)

My friend there are thousands of differing Christian churches precisely because of a lack of understanding, and an inability to discern biblical truth; therefore I add comments or emphasis certain truths with a prayerful hope that God will grant right understanding

THANKS, GBY

and Merry Christmas.
 
All you continuously show is that indeed you have faith in the RCC’s interpretation of Matthew and other Scripture and in the ECFs and in the RCC’s interpretation of their words. Without such faith however, nothing is actually proven.
OK:shrug:

So I’m to accept just any understanding of TRUTH?

GBY

Merry Christmas my friend!
 
Hello All,
I have thought a good bit about this thread over the last few days, but for today, I just want to wish everyone a Merry Christmas.
If I get to it I will respond in the horrible way I am wont to do, but if not AND for now …
Merry Christmas! I hope everyone had a great day with family, friends, and Christ!
Charity, TOm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top