The New Testament: In Medio Ecclesiae

Catholic Faith ^ | Jan 2001 | Thomas Storck

[marshmallow]

I'd simply add one thing to the article.

Look at the fruits of the "Bible trumps the Church" philosophy; division and disunity. These are the hallmarks of Satan.

Wherever you find this philosophy you will always find a plethora of dividing and continually evolving "churches", each trumpeting the Bible as its raison d' etre. It has to be this way. Once you've accepted the hypothesis that the Bible is autonomous and independent of any ecclesial structure, then it can and must be used to take one to one's own spiritual comfort zone. Each man with a Bible, becomes his own Church, so to speak.

Again, this results in confusion with respect to doctrine and splintering of a unified Christian voice proclaiming the one truth of Christ.

[Mad Dawg]

Define flaming, because from my perspective disagreement with Catholic doctrine or practice gets labeled as "Catholic bashing".

This is not a definition but an example: Look at the post immediately before yours. What is there is a counter-assertion, with no evidence offered, and the charge that we believe "hysterical myths". That's not an argument, and it's not even a simple disagreement. It's a gratuitous insult (and a misuse of 'hysterical', as far as I can tell.). THAT is an example of "bashing". The same points -- the contention that the Catholic Church originated under Constantine -- could have been made without recourse to insult.

And one of the points has some merit. "Catholic Church" has capital letters which, dollars to donuts, were not in the original text. And that's why, while I think I agree with the basic idea, this article is carelessly and needlessly controversial in it's diction.

the creation of the Catholic Church preceded the creation of the New Testament.

I would have gone with catholic Church, to address the "'catholic' as a proper name for v. as one of the 4 marks of the Church" issue.

That is, by treating Scripture as independent of the Church, instead of as something produced by the Church, ...

Personally I would have gone with "produced through the Church, " but that's just me.

[markomalley]

When you say "the early Catholics", should that not be "the early Christians"?

I fully agree with the above statement. But I didn't write the article, I just posted it. As I've stated in my earlier posts on this thread (as well as elsewhere), I believe that the two terms are completely synonymous. Unfortunately, the term "Christian" has been, in a sense, stolen from us (in common usage, not in fact).

Your statement sounds wonderful to a Catholic but how would you react to, We Protestants must patiently work with those Catholics who have been blinded from the truth by their church and pray that God will reveal His truth to them?

Actually, I posted this article for Catholic posters, not for protestant posters...to encourage them in light of the schismatics who have gone out of their way to disrupt every "Catholic" thread on FR in recent months (no, I am not calling you, Ping-Pong, a schismatic...I reserve that term for those that meet the following definition: A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism...). In fact, the hypothesis that you put forward is EXACTLY what has been going on here...except not quite as polite as the version that you proposed.

Actually, I would far prefer a live and let live attitude on this board. Things we agree on, we work together on, things we disagree on, we POLITELY discuss or simply agree to disagree, and we work to maintain the unity of the Body of Christ.

But there are some whose mission in life is the destruction of the Church. Again, not accusing you of that. Those people are as ravenous lions. As St. Peter said, Be sober, be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking some one to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experience of suffering is required of your brotherhood throughout the world. Again, that criticism is NOT repeat NOT aimed at the vast majority of Protestants. Including you.

[markomalley]

Define flaming, because from my perspective disagreement with Catholic doctrine or practice gets labeled as "Catholic bashing".

Hardly

[Uncle Chip]

The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.

So Peter did not know how to spell the word: "Rome"?

Babylon is where, according to Revelations 17-18?

Are you admitting therefore that the Church of Rome is the Whore of Babylon???

[adiaireton8]

How can I when Catholics often insist that the Church IS God?

What are you talking about? Which Catholics are claiming that the Church IS God???

-A8

[Uncle Chip]

Illegitimate, false, counterfeit -— like putting capital letter “C”s in the words “catholic” and “church” in Ignatius’ writings to change what he meant from a common noun applicable to the church at large to a proper noun to make it appear as if he was referring to the Church of Rome in particular.

[Campion]

I said non spurious not a fraudulent translation which that is. Those capital letters were added by dishonest disseminators of later centuries and your magisterium knows that.

Oh, horsefeathers. The text was written in Greek uncial, all caps. There's nothing "spurious" about it.

Ignatius, who knew some of the Apostles personally, and was probably ordained by them, called himself a "bishop of the Catholic Church" ... or "bishop of the catholic church" ... or "bIshOp of the caTHolic chURch" or however else you want to capitalize it.

The entire structure of the Roman Church is built on forgeries, spurious epistles, spurious sermons, spurious miracles, spurious relics, spurious councils, and spurious papal bulls

It's built on Christ, and him crucified. Period.

[P-Marlowe]

See post 32.

[Claud]

Peter might not have known how to spell at all. He was a fisherman! But since you brought it up...that “Marcus” that Peter mentions mentions in 1 Peter 5, may well be Mark the Evangelist who according to some sources was the interpreter/scribe of Peter. And that’s intriguing because Mark’s Gospel is just plain loaded with Roman transliterations in Greek like “kenturion”...more so than the other Gospels. It would definitely be consistent with a document written in Italy, where we’d expect the Greek to be a bit more Romanized.

And no, I am not admitting that the Roman CHURCH is the whore of Babylon. The Vatican doesn’t even sit on the seven hills and never has...so that is a stretch. I am saying that Rome the CITY is Babylon.

[GoLightly]

I understand your point & agree with your position in this case. Neither side has had clean hands, but I don't see very much whining about "Protestant bashing". Where's my picture of the box of Luther's Yipios? Luthifer & deformers anyone? We either ignore it or run with it & take it out to an outrageous extreme. Since our beliefs were hated by y'all since we rose up & split, we pretty much expect y'all to "bash" us, so when one of you does we feel no need to be shocked or offended by it.

[Campion]

How can I when Catholics often insist that the Church IS God?

Now, which Catholics insist that? Give some examples.

Doesn't it occur to you that when you say stuff like this, you need to be careful that you're not bearing false witness against your neighbor? (Yes, even Roman Catholics are your neighbors, whether or not you acknowledge them as brothers and sisters in Christ.) Does that not matter to you?

[Ping-Pong]

Thank you. I’m sorry I misunderstood.

[Uncle Chip]

Show me one, ONE primary source document from the 4th century that supports this claim. Or 5th century. Or 6th century. Where can I find this reported Eusebius? Sozemen? Take your pick of Late Roman historians, and find me one that says anything like this at all.

Show me where the title "Pontiff" or even "Pope" was ever used by a Bishop of Rome before Constantine????

[Salvation]

**The first thing to understand, and a fact that can hardly be denied, is that the creation of the Catholic Church preceded the creation of the New Testament.**

Bingo! You win, Catholics!

[Salvation]

Catholic Discussion Ping!

Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.

[adiaireton8]

The Church is the mystical body of Christ, as you yourself must acknowledge, since it is taught in Scripture. But that does not mean that (unqualifiedly) the "Church IS God". We are joined to God in such an intimate manner than we truly become one with Him, but not such that we *are* the divine nature but that we are partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). And that is why giving divine worship to fellow believers would be idolatry and a violation of the First Commandment, even though the Church is truly the mystical body of Christ, and what is said in post 32 is true.

-A8

[Uncle Chip]

Oh, horsefeathers. The text was written in Greek uncial, all caps. There's nothing "spurious" about it.

OH, SO THEN THE CAPITAL C's ARE ACCURATE. All the other letters must be spurious then???

[Mad Dawg]

Neither side has had clean hands,
Amen.

[Claud]

What's more striking of a claim, the title of Pope, or the authority of the Pope? You could call the bishop of Rome a ham sandwich and it still wouldn't affect what he is. But if you're asking me for a quote before Constantine that shows the *authority* of the Bishop of Rome, there's no better than that of Irenaeus of Lyons, ca. A.D. 170.

2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.iv.html