Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: rrc
Like I said, the church that Ignatius called universal which in Latin means catholic, is not the universal church today which you guys call catholic...

It's kinda goofy anyway...Why would you use the Latin word for universal and connect it with the English word church??? Catholic isn't a Pronoun...It means universal...Why use the Latin??? The Latin is what was used by pagan Rome in those days...Did Ignatius use the Greek word for universal in his writings or the Latin??? Why would your church insist on using the pagan Latin word???

Ignatius says the church was universal...And you say your's is the Universal church...That makes you the same??? Surely you jest...

But to answer you question truthfully, your church wasn't any where near the fisrt church to be found...

1Co 11:22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

You want to eat crow in public, or private???

There was no Catholic in the time of the spostles...It was the church of God...Ignatius called that church of God universal and some perverters of the gospel a few centuries later invented the Catholic church (using a capital C instead of the appropriate small c)...

154 posted on 05/04/2007 9:53:25 PM PDT by Iscool (OK, I'm Back...Now what were your other two wishes???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies ]


To: Iscool

DOn’t miss the forest for the trees! Ignatius is writing that if you want to find the universal church, look to the bishop. Not to your-own-personal-interpretation-of-scripture. Even if he didn’t use the word “catholic” at all; his point is there is one true church, and it can be identified by finding its leader.

Now, you can argue Orthodox v. Catholic. Maybe even some notion of Anglican/Othodox/Oriental v. Catholic. But the protestant notion that “catholic” somehow meant some invisible church of all believers is uproarious; because here we know that “catholic” meant bishops.

Further, he says this in confidence that ANY bishop suffices. This means that the bishops themselves must be in unison, disallowing the possibility of AME bishops v Catholic bishops v some self-appointed bishop like Jakes. There is one bishop, and that bishop is identical to the universal church.


177 posted on 05/05/2007 12:50:31 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson