Protestant, If Catholicism in not the church....


#1

Founded by Jesus then which one is…

If you beleive it was and went apostate then when thid this happen?


#2

[quote=Richard Lamb]Founded by Jesus then which one is…

If you beleive it was and went apostate then when thid this happen?
[/quote]

I think that the RCC can probably trace it’s roots back to Jesus. I don’t know when the RCC went a little haywire in it’s orthodoxy, but I believe it was a gradual thing, although I do believe apostate is a bit harsh of a term (there is a lot I like about the Roman Catholic Church…no Rome hating from this Christian :)).

I’m not a scholar by any means, this is just how I see things.

~mango~


#3

[quote=mango_2003]I think that the RCC can probably trace it’s roots back to Jesus. I don’t know when the RCC went a little haywire in it’s orthodoxy, but I believe it was a gradual thing, although I do believe apostate is a bit harsh of a term (there is a lot I like about the Roman Catholic Church…no Rome hating from this Christian :)).

I’m not a scholar by any means, this is just how I see things.

~mango~
[/quote]

What doctrines are not orthodox?

Pax
John


#4

[quote=mango_2003]I think that the RCC can probably trace it’s roots back to Jesus. I don’t know when the RCC went a little haywire in it’s orthodoxy, but I believe it was a gradual thing, although I do believe apostate is a bit harsh of a term (there is a lot I like about the Roman Catholic Church…no Rome hating from this Christian :)).

I’m not a scholar by any means, this is just how I see things.

~mango~
[/quote]

The this is, if you already agree that the Catholic Church is traceable to the Apostles’, albeit “can probably”, then you are to believe that it is the one and only universal Church of Christ exempt from the evils of the “gates of hell” – since the Lord Himself promised so!!

Now, how can the one, universal Church founded by the Lord Himself go haywire? let alone how can He let heresy creeps in her? does His promise of the guidance of the “Spirit of Truth” means nothing?


#5

[quote=mrS4ntA]The this is, if you already agree that the Catholic Church is traceable to the Apostles’, albeit “can probably”, then you are to believe that it is the one and only universal Church of Christ exempt from the evils of the “gates of hell” – since the Lord Himself promised so!!

Now, how can the one, universal Church founded by the Lord Himself go haywire? let alone how can He let heresy creeps in her? does His promise of the guidance of the “Spirit of Truth” means nothing?
[/quote]

The thing is…the RCC claims that they are the “True Church”…but what about Eastern Orthodox? It seems to me that they can trace their roots back to the Church of Christ…

So…somebody’s off. If you guys (the RCC and the Eastern Orthodox Church) can’t even work it out, then how are we supposed to view that claim as a reason to join one or the other?

~mango~


#6

[quote=mango_2003]The thing is…the RCC claims that they are the “True Church”…but what about Eastern Orthodox? It seems to me that they can trace their roots back to the Church of Christ…

So…somebody’s off. If you guys (the RCC and the Eastern Orthodox Church) can’t even work it out, then how are we supposed to view that claim as a reason to join one or the other?

~mango~
[/quote]

The orthodox do have apostolic succesion but they had separated themselves from Peter.


#7

[quote=Richard Lamb]The orthodox do have apostolic succesion but they had separated themselves from Peter.
[/quote]

I know that means that they don’t believe in the Pope figure…but what does that entail (if that makes any sense). What repercussions are there (according to the RCC) for denying the position of Pope as the leader of the Church?

Also, is this considered a schism?

~mango~


#8

[quote=mango_2003]I know that means that they don’t believe in the Pope figure…but what does that entail (if that makes any sense). What repercussions are there (according to the RCC) for denying the position of Pope as the leader of the Church?

Also, is this considered a schism?

~mango~
[/quote]

To deny the authority established by Jesus is to deny his authority to do so…The erpercutions are for him to judge. But my view is the closer you are to his authitaive church the better of you are…


#9

[quote=mango_2003]I know that means that they don’t believe in the Pope figure…but what does that entail (if that makes any sense). What repercussions are there (according to the RCC) for denying the position of Pope as the leader of the Church?

Also, is this considered a schism?

~mango~
[/quote]

That my friend is a question still trying to be answered. LOL

Interestingly enough, I am a member of another forum, and the subject of Apostolic Succession has come up in an interesting way. Take a look, and then come back and post your comments here.

Joao


#10

[quote=mango_2003]The thing is…the RCC claims that they are the “True Church”…but what about Eastern Orthodox? It seems to me that they can trace their roots back to the Church of Christ…

So…somebody’s off. If you guys (the RCC and the Eastern Orthodox Church) can’t even work it out, then how are we supposed to view that claim as a reason to join one or the other?

~mango~
[/quote]

S’far as I know, most EO Churches recognise the primacy of the Supreme Pontiff. There are, I believe, 4 Great Patriachs and the Bishop of Rome being the fifth of the Great Patriach – 4 of the EO Patriach acknowledge the power of the Bishop of Rome to intervene with their councils and sometimes exercise authority over them…


#11

[quote=Richard Lamb]If you beleive it was and went apostate then when thid this happen?
[/quote]

Buzz – Let us listen as the Father talks to Jesus:

“I know Jesus that you did your best, but it was not good enough. After you rose from the dead,the church apostized. Even sending the Holy Spirit did not help. So now I have to wait hundreds of yeears until <Luther, Jsoeph Smith, Judge what’s name or whoever> is born. Then he will get it right and be able to accomplish what your suffering and death on the cross and the worlk of the Holy Spirit failed to accompolish.”

NOW DOES NOT THIS SOUND CRAZY. THAT THESE PEOPLE COULD ACCOMPOLISH WHAT JESUS FAILED TO ACCOMPOLISH?

Yours in Jesus,


#12

Hi There:

The RC and he EO both present a multiplicity of convincing arguments to prove that each is authentically ,the “One and Only” church which Jesus founded. I have heard it all…and several things come to mind:

  • If you who have so much in common, cannot get it together, after a milleniun apart; how do you expect Protestants to litsen?

  • The “one” Church of the 1st Ecumenical Councils was not broken and fragmented as is the case now…so maybe neither is really “the One”…just proud halves of a dysfunctional family.

  • How can the EO be truly the Church without the Western half? The same for Rome without Orthodoxy! It reminds me of the Apostles arguing over who would be the greatest…Jesus was not impressed!

History is clear in its description of the splintering of the “Catholic Church” over the last 1500 years! First Rome and the Eastern Patriarchates then Reformation and mayhem in the West.It amost sound silly that someone would try to minimize that and pretend their piece of shattered glass is the original!

Let me respectfully add that if it truly is the Petrine ministry to confirm and strengthen faith, and to preserve unity…Our pesent situation suggests that some of Peter’s sucessors sure have done a less than adecuate job. God bless the pesent Holy Father whose work on behalf of the unity of Christians has been exemplary and worthy of the primacy he holds.

I truly feel that the key to the unity that Christ prayed for is the healing of the original rift between RC and OE…may God grant you, them and the rest of us the grace to see it happen!

Blessings

Serafin


#13

[quote=Richard Lamb]Founded by Jesus then which one is…

If you beleive it was and went apostate then when thid this happen?
[/quote]

Personally, not that this carries any weight what soever. I think that church died many moons ago. None of the churches were founded by Jesus, of course that does not mean that the churches of today do not serve him. Just an opinion from a jaded left behind.


#14

Hey Briand… when are you going to stop feeling sorry for yourself?

This is the second message board you have been on… playing the same old violin.

You are not left behind. God doesn’t think you are a turd.

You do.

I am praying for you… May God take away all your stumbling blocks, soften your heart, and bring you home! You are a treasure chest, dude! Why do I say that? Because God made you… and he loves you more than you will EVER know.


#15

I think that this could be a very good discusion if the topic stayed focused. I have been told by my friend who is a strong practicing Catholic that the succession of the apostles is clearly traced back to the Roman Catholic Church. I have never heard that the Eastern Orthodox also have similar claims to the succession. This also brings further questions that about the criticism that Protestants receive. Protestants are always being blamed for dividing the Church on the grounds that the Catholic Church is the only Church refered to in the bible. I find it ironic that this same division can be found in the Catholic Church. Understand that I am not knocking the Catholic Church, because its leadership is also human with different views, but for as much criticism as I have received I feel that an explaination is necessary.


#16

The Eastern Orthodox broke away because of political disagreements with the Pope. They retain apostalic sucsession and though are not in full communion with the Sucsessor of St. Peter things are developing, for instance the Pope and the Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Chruch are going to co-celebrate mass in Rome on the Feast day of St. Peter and St. Paul.

As for the protestant split, they did alot more damage to the Church. As for the Eastern Orthodox as close as they may be they are not Catholic until they are in Union with the Holy See, there is no division with in the Church.


#17

So you are suggesting that even though the Eastern Orthodox lay the same claim to succession, because they aren’t united with Rome that they aren’t apart of the Church. Your justification for no division in the Catholic Church is baised on the premise that because you don’t claim them, they don’t cause division. You already suggested that they split from the Church and that they share very similar views, yet you refuse to accept the action as division. A more elaborate explaination of your logic is necessary.


#18

I think where you are misunderstanding me is that it is not that I don’t lay claim to them, (they do not consider themselves a part of the Church) but that they are not in line with the Holy See, which therefore makes them not a part of the Catholic Church.

Not that they didn’t cause division but that they are not like protestant churches who claim to be apostalic but really aren’t for instance the LDSs.


#19

Careful putting Protestants in the same area as LDS. I understand where you are coming from, but I think it is clear that LDS are on a different level from both Catholics and Protestants. I am not familiar with the Holy See. What is this and why is it so critical that the Eastern Orthodox be in it?


#20

THe Holy See is another name for the Pope, or the Chair of St. Peter. These all really just mean the Sucsessor of Peter.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.