THE TRUE CHURCH

Where is this one true Church? What is this one true Church like? What are the marks by which this one true Church may be known? You may well ask such questions. Give me your attention, and I will provide you with some answers.

1. The one true Church IS COMPOSED OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE LORD JESUS. It is made up of all God's elect - of all converted men and women - of all true Christians. In whomsoever we can discern the election of God the Father, the sprinkling of the blood of God the Son, the sanctifying work of God the Spirit, in that person we see a member of Christ's true Church.

2. It is a Church OF WHICH ALL THE MEMBERS HAVE THE SAME MARKS. They are all born again of the Spirit; they all possess "repentance towards God, faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ," and holiness of life and conversation. They all hate sin, and they all love Christ. (They worship differently, and after various fashions; some worship with a form of prayer, and some with none; some worship kneeling, and some standing; but they all worship with one heart.) They are all led by one Spirit; they all build upon one foundation; they all draw their religion from one single book - that is the Bible. They are all joined to one great center - that is Jesus Christ. They all even now can say with one heart, "Hallelujah;" and they can all respond with one heart and voice, Amen and Amen.

3. It is a Church WHICH IS DEPENDENT UPON NO MINISTERS UPON EARTH, however much it values those who preach the gospel to its members. The life of its members does not hang upon Church-membership, or baptism, or the Lord's Supper - although they highly value these things when they are to be had. But it has only one Great Head - one Shepherd, one chief Bishop - and that is Jesus Christ. He alone, By His Spirit, admits the members of this Church, though ministers may show the door. Till He opens the door no man on earth can open it - neither bishops, nor presbyters, nor convocations, nor synods. Once let a man repent and believe the gospel, and that moment he becomes a member of this Church. Like the penitent thief, he may have no opportunity of being baptized; but he has that which is far better than any water-baptism - the baptism of the Spirit. He may not be able to receive the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper;but he eats Christ's body and drinks Christ's blood by faith every day he lives, and no minister on earth can prevent him. He may be ex-communicated by ordained men, and cut off from the outward ordinances of the professing Church; but all the ordained men in the world cannot shut him out of the true Church.

It is a Church whose existence does not depend on forms, ceremonies, cathedrals, churches, chapels, pulpits, fonts, vestments, organs, endowments, money, kings, governments, magistrates or any act of favor whatsoever from the hand of man. It has often lived on and continued when all these things have been taken from it. It has often been driven into the wilderness, or into dens and caves of the earth, by those who ought to have been its friends. Its existence depends on nothing but the presence of Christ and His Spirit; and they being ever with it, the Church cannot die.

4. This is the Church TO WHICH THE SCRIPTURAL TITLES OF PRESENT HONOR AND PRIVILEGE, AND THE PROMISES OF FUTURE GLORY ESPECIALLY BELONG; this is the Body of Christ; this is the flock of Christ; this is the household of faith and the family of God; this is God's building, God's foundation, and the temple of the Holy Ghost. This is the Church of the first-born, whose names are written in heaven; this is the royal priesthood, the chosen generation, the peculiar people, the purchased possession, the habitation of God, the light of the world, the salt and the wheat of the earth; this is the "Holy Catholic Church" of the Apostles' Creed; this is the "One Catholic and Apostolic Church" of the Nicene Creed; this is that Church to which the Lord Jesus promises "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it," and to which He says, "I am with you always, even unto the end of the world"(Matt.16:18; 28:2).

5. This is the only Church WHICH POSSESSES TRUE UNITY. Its members are entirely agreed on all the weightier matters of religion, for they are all taught by one Spirit. About God, and Christ, and the Spirit, and sin, and their own hearts, and faith, and repentance, and necessity of holiness, and the value of the Bible, and the importance of prayer, and the resurrection, and judgment to come - about all these points they are of one mind. Take three or four of them, strangers to one another, from the remotest corners of the earth; examine them separately on these points: you will find them all one judgment.

6. This is the only Church WHICH POSSESSES TRUE SANCTITY. Its members are all holy. They are not merely holy by profession, holy in name, and holy in the judgment of charity; they are all holy in act, and deed, and reality, and life, and truth. They are all more or less conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. No unholy man belongs to this Church.

7. This is the only Church WHICH IS TRULY CATHOLIC. It is not the Church of any one nation or people; its members are to be found in every part of the world where the gospel is received and believed. It is not confined within the limits of any one country, or pent up within the pale of any particular forms of outward government. In it there is no difference between Jew and Greek, black man and white, Episcopalian and Presbyterian - but faith in Christ is all. Its members will be gathered from north, and south, and east, and west, and will be of every name and tongue - but all one in Jesus Christ.

8. This is the only Church WHICH IS TRULY APOSTOLIC. It is built on the foundation laid by the Apostles, and holds the doctrines which they preached. The two grand objects at which its members aim are apostolic faith and apostolic practice; and they consider the man who talks of following the Apostles without possessing these two things to be no better than sounding brass and tinkling cymbal.

9. This is the only Church WHICH IS CERTAIN TO ENDURE UNTO THE END. Nothing can altogether overthrow and destroy it. Its members may be persecuted, oppressed, imprisoned, beaten, beheaded, burned; but the true Chruch is never altogether extinguished; it rises again from its afflictions; it lives on through fire and water. When crushed in one land it springs up in another. The Pharaohs, the Herods, the Neros, the Bloody Marys, have labored in vain to put down this Church; they slay their thousands, and then pass away and go to their own place. The true Church outlives them all, and sees them buried each in his turn. It is an anvil that has broken many a hammer in this world, and will break many a hammer still; it is a bush which is often burning, and yet it's not consumed.

10. This is the only Church OF WHICH NO ONE MEMBER CAN PERISH. Once enrolled in the lists of this Church, sinners are safe for eternity; they are never cast away. The election of God the Father, the continual intercession of God the Son, the daily renewing and sanctifying power of God the Holy Ghost, surround and fence them in like a garden enclosed. Not one bone of Christ's mystical Body shall ever be broken; not one lamb of Christ's flock shall ever be plucked out of His hand.

11. This is the Church WHICH DOES THE WORK OF CHRIST UPON EARTH. Its members are a little flock, and few in numbers, compared with the children of the world; one or two here, and two or three there - a few in this place and few in that. But these are they who shake the universe; these are they who change the fortunes of kingdoms by their prayers; these are they who are the active workers for spreading the knowledge of pure religion and undefiled; these are the life-blood of a country, the shield, the defence, the stay, and the support of any nation to which they belong.

12. This is the Church WHICH SHALL BE TRULY GLORIOUS AT THE END. When all earthly glory is passsed away then shall this Church be presented without spot before God the Father's throne. Thrones, principalities, and powers upon earth shall come to nothing; dignities, and offices, and endowments shall all pass away; but the Church of the first-born shall shine as the stars at the last, and be presented with joy before the Father's throne, in the day of Christ's appearing. When the Lord's jewels are made up, and manifestation of the sons of God takes place, Episcopacy, and Presbyterianism, and Congregationalism will not be mentioned; one Church only will be named, and that is the Church of the elect.

13. Reader, THIS IS THE TRUE CHURCH TO WHICH A MAN MUST BELONG, IF HE WOULD BE SAVED. Till you belong to this, you are nothing better than a lost soul. You may have the form, the husk, the skin, and the shell of religion, but you have not got the substance and the life. Yes, you may have countless outward privileges; you may enjoy great light, and knowledge - but if you do not belong to the Body of Christ, your light and knowledge and privileges will not save your soul. Alas, for the ignorance that prevails on this point! Men fancy if they join this church or that church, and become communicants, and go through certain forms, that all must be right in their souls. It is an utter delusion, it is a gross mistake. All were not Israel who were called Israel, and all are not members of Christ's Body who profess themselves Christian. TAKE NOTICE; you may be a staunch Episcopalian, or Presbyterian, or Independent, or Baptist, or Wesleyan, or Plymouth Brother - and yet not belong to the true Church. And if you do not, it will be better at last if you had never been born.

Seems I was not alone in this teaching..You can tell you do not know the pre vatican 2 church

I can see I'll be waiting until the 12th of Never for you to produce something other than someone's recollection of what Sister Mary Agnes Lucia told them in Catholic grammar school about receiving communion.

Trust me, there is no "rule" saying "its a mortal sin to chew the Host". I've read moral theology books - that sin just is not discussed because it does not exist.

You will be amazed what you will learn. The fact is they did not leave when He gave the bread of life discourse

It was all one discourse. He talked about the bred of life and flesh and all that, they murmur, He says "hey what gives? this is the way its going to be", they leave.

Well let me turn it on you ..Why did they not leave right after the first bread teaching ?

It appears that they waited to here His whole teaching, and voice final objections, before leaving. Do you commonly walk out of the middle of a sermon during Sunday worship when a visiting preacher gives a sermon you disagree with?

BTW You really do need to know the REAL Catholic Church..you know the one with the Latin Mass..you have never learned the faith of the fathers..your ignorance of it shows all over the place.

Mom, I go to the Latin Mass every Sunday. Either Our Lady of Consolation at 2 pm in Tacony in Philadelphia or Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin, NJ at 11:30 am. In fact, I helped regularize the later group into the Church. Before that I attended Latin Mass every Sunday at St. Agnes (11 am) in New York City, before that Holy Trinity in Boston at 12 noon, before that St. Boniface at 11 am in Pittsburgh. Before that I was an Episcopalian. As you can see, I've always attended nearly exclusively the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Mass.

As usual in your hatred, you have no idea what you are talking about or how ignorantly insulting you are.

Keep it up. You are a poster child of ex-Catholic vitriol, stupidity, and hate. Like a big neon sign saying - "Watch Out! Don't Leave the Church or you'll end up like me!"

Why ask me, ... rather than the Author ?

Cause I'm talking to you.

So, ... you think that I would know better than the Author ?

I don't see where you get this from that one verse. The sacrifice is an exchange of gifts, like all sacrifices. We offer to God and He blesses us with His favor. He doesn't do an end around on us, but rather blesses us with what is at hand. We do nto offer Jesus to Him and get credited in some spiritual bank accoutn that then mystically we receive from. No. We receive from God blessing and grace from sharing in the very same sacrifice.

Do we offer Jesus' body and blood or ... did Jesus offer His body and blood ?

Exactly. It's amazing how your words are so very true, yet your position is so very wrong.. The "Food" given in trade is nothing other than the very Victim Himself, who is our Spiritual nourishment.

This is not consistent with Jesus' words in John 6:63.

Yes, exactly. I just wish you would think about what this actually says. The flesh, our flesh, our worldly body profits nothing from the exchange.

How do you justify the changing of the objective flesh, in this discourse, ... from that of Jesus' flesh, ... to that of our flesh ?

Where do we make that turn in the discussion, particularly as He identifies the quickening (life-giving) spirit as His words ?

With the vowels ommitted, is there potential for ambiguity?

Very little. The Bible, children's books and poetry are typically printed with vowels, though vowels are not part of the Hebrew alphabet; if you've seen Hebrew, the vowels are little dots and lines mostly under the letters. A normal Hebrew book for adults might have one or two vowels put in where there would be ambiguity without them. Magazines -- at least the ones I've seen -- don't bother.

When the Greeks adopted the alphabet from the Phoenicians, they found that Greek needed written vowels and used letters that Greek had no corresponding sound for as the vowels they needed.

That is precisely correct. In Hebrew, these are consonants, not vowels.

You are very good at giving the Masoretic-Talmud line. Don't you think it a little strange that the letters equivalent to vowels in other languages are "silent", "consonants", etc.? Its not like the Hebrews went and made up the alphabet on their own. They took a handy one from nearby. Paleo-Hebrew has vowels. The scribes removed them in Babylonia and took up the Aramaic alphbet.

"A mitre also of fine linen encompassed his head, which was tied by a blue ribbon, about which there was another golden crown, in which was engraven the sacred name [of God]: it consists of four vowels." The Wars of the Jews, Book 5 - FROM THE COMING OF TITUS TO BESIEGE JERUSALEM, TO THE GREAT EXTREMITY TO WHICH THE JEWS WERE REDUCED,Chapter 5 - A DESCRIPTION OF THE TEMPLE, paragraph 7.

he is actually an "H", not an "E".

Same thing. The real "h" is "heth". This is like pretending "i" and "j" are not the same letter in Latin and Greek, because there was no "j" or "juh" sound in either language. Is "i" not a vowel in Greek because it is "really" a "j"?

In written Hebrew, vowel sounds may be added by the use of dots and dashes -- called "points" -- to clarify pronunciation. They are written either above, below, or inside the letter. Some of these are for vowels. Others indicate whether, for example pei has a "P" or an "F" sound. In Torah scrolls used in synagogues, the text is unpointed. This is true as well for modern Hebrew. Most written Hebrew in Israel is written without vowels indicated.

Modern Hebrew is utterly irrelevant to this discussion.

but there is room for ambiguity.

No, the words mean what they mean. But there is room for misunderstanding from those who lack familiarity with the language.

So there is no way, for example, the Lamb of God might be mistaken for a limb of God? There are no Hebrew words which share consonants? All context is always clear?

I find that hard to believe. I'm only asking for 1 percent.

ashamed with your ignorance huh?:>)

One of those links was from a priest. See their were very many subtle changes over the years . Gnawing on Christ was just one of them

Well let me turn it on you ..Why did they not leave right after the first bread teaching ?
It appears that they waited to here His whole teaching, and voice final objections, before leaving. Do you commonly walk out of the middle of a sermon during Sunday worship when a visiting preacher gives a sermon you disagree with? Ohhh yes right.. How do you know it was over? It was over because they left..

They left right after that without waiting for further teaching

Jhn 6:66 From that [time] many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Then perhaps you need to ask some of the others about the history of chewing the host..In fact watch as they leave the altar..see how many are gnawing

there is no reason why that word would not be used in a metaphor. It was the desire of Christ to shock the hearers and to drive off the chaff.

Except that it is never used as metaphor elsewhere. For it to be metaphor here is to change its collloquial usage. A prima facia case of eisegesis.

Please read the scripture with clarity.

Answered for the most part above in comment 109 above.

Nevertheless, the simple and clear interpretation of this is that the Jews took him literally. Are you suggesting that the symbolic meaning, the easier meaning, drove them away? Clearly not. And again, Jesus did not say "my flesh profiteth nothing" he said "the flesh profiteth nothing." For your interpretation to work, no matter how convoluted, Jesus would have had to mean "my flesh profiteth nothing". Clearly the flesh of Jesus, the Word Incarnate, profiteth everything.

And then there is the historical reality that, for nigh on 2,000 years, back to the very first believers who learned from the Apostles, the Catholic Church has unambiguosly believed in the Real Presence. Can you appreciate what that means for all Christians?

A shocking thought for those that believed in salvation by their WORKS.

If you wish to argue doctrine, than at least understand it first. The CC does not teach salvation by works. I rather imagine you've been told this 1,000 times, but let me make it 1,001.

Protestants often misunderstand the Catholic teaching on merit, thinking that Catholics believe that one must do good works to come to God and be saved. This is exactly the opposite of what the Church teaches. The Council of Trent stressed: "[N]one of those things which precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification; for if it is by grace, it is not now by works; otherwise, as the Apostle [Paul] says, grace is no more grace" (Decree on Justification 8, citing Rom. 11:6). It is the free gift of God's grace that brings salvation.

The Catholic Church teaches only Christ is capable of meriting in the strict sense —- mere man cannot (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2007). The most merit humans can have is condign —- when, under the impetus of God’s grace, they perform acts which please him and which he has promised to reward (Rom. 2:6–11, Gal. 6:6–10). Thus God’s grace and his promise form the foundation for all human merit (CCC 2008).

Virtually all of this is agreed to by Protestants, who recognize that, under the impetus of God’s grace, Christians do perform acts which are pleasing to God and which God has promised to reward, meaning that they fit the definition of merit. When faced with this, Protestants are forced to admit the truth of the Catholic position -—nevertheless, contrary to Paul’s command (2 Tim. 2:14), they may still dispute the terminology.

>The Catholic Church explains that the Holy Spirit guides the Church in unity. Although I must still seek spiritual discernment for myself, it can at least shield me from sin by clearly, unambiguously, and in unity teaching me how to discern, and how not to fall into sin.<

I am sorry but I see no unity in the teachings of the Catholic church. You have some leaders who ok homosexuality,divorce,married clergy and birth control.I believe you have a term for it within your ranks.How can these priests,cardinals and bishops be shielding you from sin or teaching you correctly? If you don't rely on scripture and the Holy Spirit how do you spot the wolves?When was the last time one of these wolves was removed by your church except for a secular legal matter? I can give you plenty of examples of bodies of believers in the evangelical churches that have removed pastors for broken vows as well as unsound doctine. Whats Visible to me is a church claiming to speak for Christ but ignoring basics and not doing a thing to intoduce the lost within their ranks to the Risen Lord

You are very good at giving the Masoretic-Talmud line.

What I'm telling you happens to be the truth. This isn't true just for Hebrew, but for other Semitic languages as well.

The real "h" is "heth".

You don't know what you're talking about. "H" is the closest English equivalent to the Hebrew letter he. "Heth" is a bad transliteration for the Hebrew letter pronounced chet, with the "ch" pronounced like the German "Bach". English of course doesn't have gutterals, so there is no English equivalent.

So, ... you think that I would know better than the Author ?

I think you know your definition of "eye" better than I do. I asked God, but He wouldn't tell me, though I know He knows. so I'm asking you.

This is really irrelevant, anyway. I told you what I meant by "eye." If you don't want to tell me what you mean by the word, and want to use some other definition, then we'll just agree to disagree.

Do we offer Jesus' body and blood or ... did Jesus offer His body and blood ?

Or? Jesus did and Jesus does. We unite ourselves tot he one-time offering. It's one of those wow-man space time continuum outside of time eternity things.

The "Food" given in trade is nothing other than the very Victim Himself, who is our Spiritual nourishment.

This is not consistent with Jesus' words in John 6:63.

It is when you read the rest of the chapter. And recognize Jesus isn't dissing His Own Flesh.

How do you justify the changing of the objective flesh, in this discourse, ... from that of Jesus' flesh, ... to that of our flesh ?

I read His Words. He says "the flesh." Not "my flesh." Two different things. When He says "the flesh" in verse 63, He is speaking metaphorically of the base, carnal human part of our selves. Contrasted with our spirits.

You don't know what you're talking about. "H" is the closest English equivalent to the Hebrew letter he. "Heth" is a bad transliteration for the Hebrew letter pronounced chet, with the "ch" pronounced like the German "Bach". English of course doesn't have gutterals, so there is no English equivalent.

"he" as in "Yahweh" (or whatever it is), both instances of which are vowel sounds, not consonant sounds. "H" is a soft consonant that essentially is a vowel. Thus "an historian" and the like in English, where the pronunciation is the same.

Keep trying. 10th century pronunciation by Rabbis is no sure guide at all to true pronunciation 2000 years previously. Just look at how much Latin changed in that time.

Aleph and ayin are silent consonants; I don't know what the sound of aleph was, but ayin remains in one dialect (Yemenite?) pronounced as a glottal catch.

There is sufficient information on this thread to show that they were vowels. I know the Masoretes don't think they are vowels.

'He' is not e but h, pronounced like h.

"h" makes vowel sounds. Its a soft consonant in English.

Yod corresponds to y. When the Greeks adopted the alphabet from the Phoenicians, they used letters representing sounds they didn't have to represent the vowels they needed.

Its a lovely theory. I'm sure the Masoretes would be proud.

Whats Visible to me is a church claiming to speak for Christ but ignoring basics and not doing a thing to intoduce the lost within their ranks to the Risen Lord

You are confusing the doctrines of Catholicism with the practices of Catholics. Catholicism is true. Doctrinally, it is well documented and explained. Catholics are human. Catholics sin. The Church, comprised of such sinners, is always in need of reform. Neverteless, the doctrine of the Church remains true. As has been said elsewhere: "The problem with Catholicism is not Catholicism, the problem with Catholicism is Catholics". It would be so much easier if we were all angels ;-)

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.