Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: adiaireton8
To: Blogger Upon what do you base your belief that the Catholic church was founded by Christ in 33 AD?

The testimony of the Church.


Aside from the fact that this is Circular reasoning (which I will admit to on my own behalf but you will not on your own in all likelihood) How do you know your interpretation of the Church's testimony is correct?

And, NO. That is NOT Gnosticism.

Yes it is. It denies the material aspect of the Church, making its unity *merely* spiritual, something far inferior to the unity which Christ's prays in John 17 that His disciples would have.


No it isn't. I didn't deny a material aspect. We are humans. We are in physical human bodies. Christ will resurrect these physical bodies and glorify them in the future. I deny that the church of Christ is an Organization centralized in Rome.



Grow up.
That's an ad hominem.

No. That's an observation.

As an organism, we are part of Christ's body. Christ's body is NOT an organization but an organism.

You are assuming that an organism cannot be an organization. That's a false assumption. Christ founded a Church, with a hiearchical authority structure: Apostles, and bishops, presbyters, and deacons.


But that hierarchical structure is NOT the church. The church is the people. Not the structure.

Otherwise, you are saying Christ allowed his body to be polluted by all of the SSOEAs throughout history. Popes with illegitimate children. Priests having sex with children. Popes having orgies in the vatican. Anti-popes.

This is just as true if the body of Christ is an organism. When believers (especially those in authority) do evil, they bring shame and pollution into the body of Christ. That requires repentence and confession and reparation. But it does not destroy Christ's body; the gates of hell cannot prevail against Christ's Church.


Nice try, but not quite the right answer. We do not have to make reparations. We don't do penance. We don't have more sacrifices made for us. Christ's one sacrifice perfected us once for all. That is our only standing and claim to righteousness before God.

However, These Popes, Cardinals, and other SSOEAs have foisted upon those under their care many falsehoods over time - speaking ex-cathedra. By what authority can a church that for most of the Middle ages was made up largely of SSOEAs engaging in Simony, Pluralism, Selling Indulgences have any claim to any authority?

The church of Christ is ALL BELIEVERS. Regardless if they are in a Catholic church structure, Baptist, Methodist, Presybterian. If one believes in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior, then one is a part of His body.

That is true, but as I said already, Christ's Church subsists in the Catholic Church. In other words, baptized Baptists and Methodists and Presbyterians, etc. are in fact (whether they know it or not) Catholics who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church. By their [Trinitarian] baptism they are brought into [incomplete] communion with the Catholic Church.

We weren't proclaimed so at Trent.
2,779 posted on 12/22/2006 3:08:25 PM PST by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2775 | View Replies ]


To: Blogger
Blogger Upon what do you base your belief that the Catholic church was founded by Christ in 33 AD?

A8: The testimony of the Church.

Blogger: Aside from the fact that this is Circular reasoning (which I will admit to on my own behalf but you will not on your own in all likelihood)

If God directly told you that He is the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and you replied, "Upon what do you base your belief that you are the Creator of the heavens and the earth?", He might very well reply, "Upon my own testimony". And if you replied, "But that's circular reasoning", He might reply, "There is nothing greater than my own testimony. My word is truth. Appealing to my own word is more certain and more sure and more authoritative than appealing to anything else."

Jesus told the Apostles that He had been sent by the Father, and that all authority had been given to Him [Jesus]. The Apostles also report that Jesus gave authority to them [the Apostles], saying, "He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." (Luke 10:16) He also gave them authority so that whatever they bound on earth was bound in heaven, and loosed on earth was loosed in heaven.

If you were to ask the Apostles: "Upon what do you base your belief that the Church was founded by Christ?", they would probably have replied, "On the words of Christ". And if you had said, "Why should we believe you, rather than the teachings about Christ spread by other people like Simon Magus?" They would have replied, "We are eyewitnesses; Christ Himself gave us authority and commissioned us to speak in His name." They may also have appealed to the miracles that they performed as well.

If you had lived in the first generation after the death of the Apostles, and you had asked a bishop like Ignatius, "Upon what do you base your belief that the Church was founded by Christ?", he would have replied, "The testimony of the Apostles." And if you had replied, "Why should we believe you, rather than our interpretation of the writings left by the Apostles?" He would have replied, "Because the Apostles gave us bishops authority and responsibility and power through our ordination by the laying on of their hands to safeguard the deposit of faith which they passed on to us in their writings and oral teachings. We are the shepherds of the Church of God, and any teaching or interpretation contrary to the doctrine we pronounce is ipso facto heterodoxy.

No it isn't. I didn't deny a material aspect....I deny that the church of Christ is an Organization ...

If you deny that the Church of Christ subsists in an organization, then you are denying a material aspect. The unity of the Church is not merely a spiritual unity (i.e. we all share the same doctrine, or love). We are united by being in communion with our bishop. And the bishops are united by being in communion with the successor of Peter, the bishop of Rome. As #882 of the Catechism says, "The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful." The faithful on earth are united into one organic whole by being united to a *material* head, namely, the bishop of Rome. Without a visible material head, there cannot be perfect material unity. And without perfect material unity, there cannot be the kind of unity Christ prays in John 17 for His followers to have, a unity that (according to Christ) should be like that of the Father and the Son.

But that hierarchical structure is NOT the church. The church is the people. Not the structure.

It is not either/or. I agree that the structure is not identical to the Church. But the hierarchical structure is an intrinsic part of the Church, and cannot be removed from the Church. Even in the world to come, the twelve Apostles will sit on twelve thrones and judge (rule). (Matt 19:28, and Luke 22:30)

We do not have to make reparations. We don't do penance. We don't have more sacrifices made for us. Christ's one sacrifice perfected us once for all. That is our only standing and claim to righteousness before God.

Well, you're in for a surprise. But getting into that would have us juggle too many things at a time. If the Catholic Church is what she says she is, then her teaching on penance is true. So it all depends on whether the Church is who and what she says she is.

However, These Popes, Cardinals, and other SSOEAs have foisted upon those under their care many falsehoods over time - speaking ex-cathedra. By what authority can a church that for most of the Middle ages was made up largely of SSOEAs engaging in Simony, Pluralism, Selling Indulgences have any claim to any authority?

Neither the bishops in ecumenical council nor the Pope speaking ex cathedra, has ever taught "simony", "pluralism", or "selling indulgences".

We weren't proclaimed so at Trent.

Do you have a particular pronouncement or declaration of Trent in mind? The Church has always recognized the distinction between knowingly apostasizing, and unknowingly becoming a part of a schismatic or heretical sect. Section #838 of the Catechism reads, "Those who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."

-A8

2,787 posted on 12/22/2006 4:41:04 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2779 | 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