One of the real joys of spending time reading and studying the writings of the earliest Christians (aka the Early Church Fathers) is gaining a bit of insight into what life was like those who professed to be Christian.Posted on 01/15/2012 2:36:04 PM PST by narses
One of the real joys of spending time reading and studying the writings of the earliest Christians (aka the Early Church Fathers) is gaining a bit of insight into what life was like those who professed to be Christian.
One of the real surprises (at least to me) was how early the term “Catholic” came to be used to refer to all Christians.
How early? How about the year 107 … maybe even earlier!
From the Letter to the Smyrnaeans by St. Ignatius of Antioch:
Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid.
Note that St. Ignatius is a real hero of the early Church – both a bishop and a martyr at the hands of the Romans, he left an awesome written legacy of letters to local churches … primarily encouragement as he marched to his martyrdom.
The current wiki article presents a good overview of the life of St. Ignatius of Antioch. From that article comes this paragraph:
It is from the word katholikos that the word “catholic” comes. When Ignatius wrote the Letter to the Smyrnaeans in about the year 107 and used the word “catholic”, he used it as if it were a word already in use to describe the Church. This has led many scholars to conclude that the appellation “Catholic Church” with its ecclesial connotation may have been in use as early as the last quarter of the first century.
While this may seem like a small point, I think it’s rather significant – the sense of universality, of all Christians belonging to the church that they themselves called katholikos … this gives us some real insight into what Christians thought important.
An Opposing View
Notice it is in direct contrast to the probably well-intentioned, but definitely historically inaccurate perspective of those who oppose the reality of the one Church founded by Jesus Christ. Typical of this perspective is a recent post by Thomas H., who writes from a Baptist perspective:
The application of the word “catholic” was not used in reference to all supposed Christians until the Council of Trent. This word was used by catholics to beat over the heads of non catholics in the sence of saying you do not belong to the true church. This resulted in the murder of hundreds of thousands of Christians who were not Roman Catholics by the emissaries of Rome.
I think you get the idea … the only real problem with all that is it doesn’t square with the historical record on any level, starting with the word catholic.
The Historical Reality
I can empathize with folks like Thomas – when you have spent your whole life being told bits and pieces of what happened, along with stuff that’s simply not true by folks who spent their lives in the same circumstances, it must be hard to be open to the reality that contradicts what you believe.
Yet, the historical record is clear, and provides an eloquent testimony to the truth … from its earliest days the Church understood that unity and universality were basic marks of the Church founded by Jesus Christ.
It began calling itself katholikos around the end of the first century, at most a few years after the death of the last apostle (John). It did not begin with the Council of Trent (late 16th century – nearly 1500 years later) or any other time. In fact, by the time the canon of Scripture – what we call the Bible – was settled Christians had been calling themselves Catholics for almost 300 years … longer than the United States has even been a country!
That Church remains Catholic to this day, and will remain so until the end of time (Matthew 16:18+).
An Invitation
If this does not seem right to you, please investigate on your own. Look into the historical record – pagan, Jewish, or Christian – and see what evidence supports each side. What you’ll find is exactly what the Church has always understood … it is katholikos, and has been so from the beginning.
The writings of the Early Church Fathers are widely available, with treatments ranging from the easily-accessible to the more in-depth, scholarly works. A good place to start for most folks is Four Witnesses by Rod Bennett – a very readable account, well-grounded in current scholarship,
Are you saying Adam and Eve did NOT worship God? How about Caan or Abel? If there are two or more that meet in His Name . . . yeah Gods Church has been around a lot longer than yours.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2833359/posts?page=196#196
You have another error here. Please go back to Geneisis.
Un the beginning God......
not Jesus Christ — although there is mention of him in the word, “word” as there is mention of the Holy Spirit in the word “wind.”
But it is God the Father who created the world.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2833359/posts?page=196#196
You have another error here. Please go back to Geneisis.
Un the beginning God......
not Jesus Christ — although there is mention of him in the word, “word” as there is mention of the Holy Spirit in the word “wind.”
But it is God the Father who created the world.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2833359/posts?page=196#196
And god created the entire world not just the Garden of Eden. Are you thinking too literally? I think so.
No Catholic that I know has any obsession with either Luther or Sola Scriptura. Unfortunately, one cannot participate in any theological discussion in this Forum without Sola Scripture being made the predicate in any argument by Protestants. Each and every time "show me where in the the bible...." is presented in a disjunctive premise asserting that absence from Scripture is an automatic invalidation an appeal to Luther's authority is posed. The rejection of Luther and the premise dies not constitute an obsession with either.
I am disheartened that you feel so much animosity towards Catholics. We are not your enemies or even your rivals. We are your brothers and sisters in Christ. If you concentrate on our differences you will surely find them as you will find them between all individual believers. But if you concentrate on what we collectively love you will find we are united by something greater than any of us. I will leave you with this:
“Protestants, Jews and Catholics have God, morality, and religion in common. In the name of God, let us - Jews, Protestants, and Catholics - do two things: 1. Realize that an attack upon one is an attack upon all, since we are all one in God; it is not tolerance we need, but charity; not forbearance but love. 2. Begin doing something about religion, and the least we can do is say our prayers; to implore God’s blessings upon the world and our country; to thank Him for his blessings; and to become illumined in the fullness of His truth. There is entirely too much talk about religion and not enough action.” Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
Are you positive? Could it not have been God the Son? After all He has been the intermediary between God the Father and man.
Of course God created the world. I never said different. Your contention addresses where the first Church was. I say it was the Garden of Eden. That was the address of Adam and Eve. They worshiped there.
In general I do not hold animosity towards Catholics. I do tire of their arrogance, name calling and off the wall debate tactics. Occasionally I respond in like manner. The real object of my scorn is the institution of the Catholic Church and not its members. Its doctrines veer so far off the mark I feel I should respond to them. Maybe someone somewhere is warned off and will seek the Biblical God.
Worshipped? I always thought they disobeyed God while they were there.....hardly worship.
You seem to have mistaken the Catholic Church for one among many joinable institutions. Catholics see it as one body. It is Holy, it is Catholic and it is Apostolic. It was founded by Jesus and its governance was determined when Jesus declared Peter its first Pope. For those of us in Communion, it is who we are, not where we pray.
What you call arroganc we believe is an unwillingness to compromise. We love our separated brothers and sisters, but ecumenicalism is not a negotiation.
I suppose you think all they did all day long was think up ways to disobey God and make Him angry. Yes, I think they worshiped God as their Creator. And saw Him regularly up until they sinned.
What do you mean by worship; there were four different Hebrew words for worship used in the Old Testament and 11 different Greek words used for Worship in the New Testament. Without a knowledge of good and evil how were the actions of Adam and Eve actual worship or any different from animals who also lack that same knowledge?
God made Adam above the animals. He gave him dominion over the earth. Adam was not some simpleton. There is much not recorded in the Bible. God rested on the seventh day to be an example for His new creation. They were to commune together. God was not some absentee landlord leaving Adam to try to figure stuff out on his own. It is mans duty to seek out the will of God. Adam knew that.
Broken? You mean like when the Catholic Church split into an Eastern and a Western Church?
OK, but it didn't answer my question. What do you mean by worship?
True...
So no to infant baptism. -- yet entire households were baptised by the Apostles, hmmm... so one person a couple of millenia after this decides that they want to re-interpret...
(1)I do not think I am the only one on earth that reads the Bible this way
(2)Is this baptism by immersion or sprinkles? If by sprinkling my family and I get baptized regularly every time it rains from the heavens.
(3)There is no explicit verse to back up infant baptism.
(4)Infants could be dedicated to the Lord by their parent(s) but that is different from baptism by a profession of faith.
Riddle me this. If infant baptism is so great and Jesus is our example, why wasn’t He baptized at birth? Or the disciples?
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.