Posted on 05/16/2015 4:53:17 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
TRUE CHURCH and BIBLE
Catholic Church History Facts
When did the Church established by Jesus Christ get the name Catholic?
Christ left the adoption of a name for His Church to those whom he commissioned to teach all nations. Christ called the spiritual society He established, "My Church" (Mt. xvi, 18), "the Church" (Mt. xviii, 17).
In order to have a distinction between the Church and the Synagogue and to have a distinguishing name from those embracing Judaic and Gnostic errors we find St. Ignatius (50-107 AD) using the Greek word "Katholicos" (universal) to describe the universality of the Church established by Christ. St. Ignatius was appointed Bishop of Antioch by St. Peter, the Bishop of Rome. It is in his writings that we find the word Catholic used for the first time. St. Augustine, when speaking about the Church of Christ, calls it the Catholic Church 240 times in his writings.
St. Ignatius of Antioch, disciple of the Apostle John, concerning the heretics of his day wrote: "They have abstained from the Eucharist and prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of Our Savior Jesus Christ."
St. Justin Martyr, another Church Father of the second century wrote: "This food is known among us as the Eucharist... We do not receive these things as common bread and common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior, being made flesh by the Word of God."
(Excerpt) Read more at marianland.com ...
Jesus said unto him, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Still tyrying to push forward this junk; eh?
15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.
They DO???
Just what ARE these things you allude to but never are able to post?
• Augustine, sermon:
"Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. — John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine , © 1993 New City Press, Sermons, Vol III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327
Upon this rock, said the Lord, I will build my Church. Upon this confession, upon this that you said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer her (Mt. 16:18). — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 236A.3, p. 48.
• Augustine, sermon:
For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, 'On this rock will I build my Church,' because Peter had said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. — Augustine Tractate CXXIV; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, Volume VII Tractate CXXIV (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.cxxv.html)
• Augustine, sermon:
And Peter, one speaking for the rest of them, one for all, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:15-16)...And I tell you: you are Peter; because I am the rock, you are Rocky, Peter-I mean, rock doesn't come from Rocky, but Rocky from rock, just as Christ doesn't come from Christian, but Christian from Christ; and upon this rock I will build my Church (Mt 16:17-18); not upon Peter, or Rocky, which is what you are, but upon the rock which you have confessed. I will build my Church though; I will build you, because in this answer of yours you represent the Church. — John Rotelle, O.S.A. Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 270.2, p. 289
• Augustine, sermon:
Peter had already said to him, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' He had already heard, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not conquer her' (Mt 16:16-18)...Christ himself was the rock, while Peter, Rocky, was only named from the rock. That's why the rock rose again, to make Peter solid and strong; because Peter would have perished, if the rock hadn't lived. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 244.1, p. 95
• Augustine, sermon:
...because on this rock, he said, I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not overcome it (Mt. 16:18). Now the rock was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Was it Paul that was crucified for you? Hold on to these texts, love these texts, repeat them in a fraternal and peaceful manner. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1995), Sermons, Volume III/10, Sermon 358.5, p. 193
• Augustine, Psalm LXI:
Let us call to mind the Gospel: 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church.' Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to build upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: 'But the Rock was Christ.' On Him therefore builded we have been. — Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VIII, Saint Augustin, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm LXI.3, p. 249. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.LXI.html)
• Augustine, in “Retractions,”
In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. — The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1:.
You DO read my stuff!
“To illustrate how you do know NOT want to deal with FACTS about your church’s history.”
Do you REALLY think I'm going to look thru that entire mass of text to try to find something you CLAIM is in it?
If it's so easy to see, then YOU post it!
“Honestly, which source is less biased; Schaff or the Encyclopedia Britannica?”
This question is a “Category” mistake of logic.
“A category mistake, or category error, is a semantic or ontological error in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category” (wiki).
Both items are biased because both are written by people who bring their own biases, educational prejudices, emotional experience filters and presuppositions into their feeling, thinking and writing.
Their biases are *likely* different. Unless you know their backgrounds, emotional experiences, presuppositions, etc., you will not understand how they differ.
This is why regardless of source, the task is to analyze the evidence and not simply react. It is a lifelong task. It is worthy of effort.
Sound a lot like 'poisoning the well'. It is also rather eye-opening lack of reasoning to state in the same passage a demand for an "unbiased" source then demand it be a "secular source". By that very demand - secular - you have just made it biased. This is because as a view - secularism - already has its biases and world view. As already noted - if you don't like the view, then provde documentation why. To say a source is 'biased' without documenting is a lazy way out of the conversation. Prove why it is biased.
Have a good day.
You’re still not dealing with the facts. Again. Enjoy.
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/web_aug.htm
Have a good day.
“If it’s so easy to see, then YOU post it!”
It’s all right there:
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/web_aug.htm
No, this is a false statement, whether intentional or not.
I posted a source that flags important issues that any objective person must analyze when judging the validity of Ignatius.
I also acknowledge that the author has some problems and I do not share all his beliefs.
To sort out those two different issues requires thought. Some can some can't. That is understandable. That some can but won't is a tragedy.
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."
F. Scott Fitzgerald, "The Crack-Up" (1936)
Because the Protestant Reformation occurred several centuries later, that church was the church of the Protestant forefathers too. Both Catholics and Protestants can trace their spiritual lineage back to that church. When a tree forks both forks have a claim to the truck. Given the corruption that Martin Luther was confronting, you have no assurance that the Early Church Fathers would have sided with Catholic Church at the Reformation.
The Books in the Bible did not fall from the skies and self-assemble themselves. Thus if Petrine authority was the infallible source for this selection and arrangement of books it did not disappear ELEVEN centuries later with the curse of the Reformation in the fifteenth century.
For the preservation of God's Word, we can thank the Holy Spirit, not a bunch of men in black robes.
Renowned English essayist...Here’s a mind boggling list of serious intellectuals
Enough with the puffery already. Can't these people's thoughts and accomplishments stand on their own merit?
There are so many shoals of shallow fish to bait, that every Protestant denomination, some 30,000 of them will always have some adherents of one sort or another, to say nothing of the Joel Osteens, Billy Grahams, David Koresh’s, Jim Jones’s, and the Rev. Jeremiah Wrights.
There are many serious, conscientious, well-educated, intelligent Protestants. To imply that they are "shoals of shallow fish to bait" is ignorance and/or arrogance in the extreme. Insults have no place in intelligent discourse.
They all have one thing in common in amassing fortunes for themselves and their families by preaching what is in essence vapid rot.
For every lucre-motivated pastor, there are thousands of preachers who pastor small flocks with no plans or desires to get rich, often holding another job or two to keep the church going. To say nothing of the thousands of Protestant missionaries who suffer hardship and forego other careers to spread the Word. This constant refrain of yours slanders many, many conscientious Christians.
smh You are the one demanding a 'secular' source which by definition follows secular world view points and though it may not overtly "promote secularism" it presents those view points
Yours is the sloppy scholarship (and serious lack thereof) because I never said it "promotes" those view points. aka a strawman response. smh
“There are many serious, conscientious, well-educated, intelligent Protestants”.
Let’s rephrase that.
There are many serious, conscientious, well-educated intelligent former protestants that have converted by the hundreds of thousands into the Catholic faith.
I guarantee you more “serious, conscientious, well-educated protestants” have became Catholic than the other way around.
Any serious student of the Bible comes to one conclusion, and that is ALL ROADS LEAD TO ROME. They might go kicking and screaming but if they are true to themselves and listen to God’s calling, they end up Catholic. The list is absolutely endless. Have a great day.
Have a good day.
NEVER took the opportunity to assert Peter’s alleged supremacy, which would have been the perfect time to do so. He never even mentioned it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.