Is The Catholic Church the church that Jesus Founded? Is it the only path to salvation? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 41 Old 07-02-2009, 08:49 PM - Thread Starter
 
kimiij's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have serious issues with these two assertions. Can anyone provide enlightenment?

I have always been drawn to the Catholic church and have been near the point of converting several times. BUT, I just cannot get past the service itself (Mass) and the two below assertions.

What evidence is there that the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ founded/meant to found?

Why is salvation only found in the Catholic Church?

Am I wrong about these? If I am right that these are beliefs held by the Catholic church, what evidence backs up these assertions?
kimiij is offline  
#2 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 12:08 AM
 
CrunchyChristianMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 2,649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I'm not personally Catholic and don't know if the Catholic church believes those things. But, here's a great link that teaches about the history of the Christian church in 8 lessons. If you click on each one there is an mp3 of the class being taught and notes that go along with it. HTH!

http://www.generationword.com/_notes...h_history.html

Elizabeth - Doing life with Scott partners.gif

SAHM to Evelyn - my crazy little Celiac (4) energy.gif Annabelle (2)  love.gif and Abraham (born 6/20) buddamomimg1.png
adoptionheart-1.gif  Follow our journey  mdcblog5.gif

CrunchyChristianMama is offline  
#3 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 12:27 AM
 
sweetsunshine85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: on a mole hill in the woods! ;)
Posts: 2,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It is a doctrine of the Church that "Outside the Church there is no Salvation." (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Sallus)

bellycast.gifI am the Goddess, I am the Mother, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals.dust.gif
sweetsunshine85 is offline  
#4 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 12:59 AM
 
JollyGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I normally stay out of discussions in this forum as I'm just not knowledgable enough. But I saw this from new posts.

Quote:
What evidence is there that the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ founded/meant to found?
The Catholic Church can trace it's roots and history back to Peter the Apostle. We consider him the first Pope (though the designation and office of Pope became much later. For a long time in Church history the Pope was simply the bishop of Rome). Therefore Catholics consider themselves the Church founded by Jesus based on the fact that Jesus commanded his apostles to go out and spread the word of the lord. And even if you don't consider Peter the first Pope the Catholic Church can trace it's roots back to Jesus. Yes all other religions can as well. However, the vast majority of them are offshoots of Catholicism or offshoots of offshoots.
Quote:
Why is salvation only found in the Catholic Church?
You will find this claim in numerous christian religions, not only Catholicism. You will also find it is heavily debated among Catholics themselves. I remember numerous debates about this very issue (and about the related question of whether you can attain salvation without a belief in Jesus at all, but a good life). I've been Catholic my whole life and I've heard both parishioners and priests argue on either side of this question. Personally, I know very few Catholics that believe that the only way to salvation is through the Catholic Church (I do know several who think the opposite). I however do not know the official church doctrine on it. But I guess since I'm Catholic and I don't personally believe the only way to salvation is through my Church I guess I don't consider it a belief that precludes considering yourself Catholic.

Mom to DS 4/24/03 and DD 4/17/06
JollyGG is online now  
#5 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 01:26 AM
 
greenmagick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 2,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am no longer Catholic and really dont know the official stance, but going to Catholic school for 13 years and my whole family being catholic....I have never heard that only catholics go to heaven.

Nicole - )0( unschooling mama to Lilahblahblah.gif (12/21/05) and Cianwild.gif (9/21/07) as well as 3 dog2.gif 2 cat.gif,  4 rats, chicken3.gif and ducks
 
 

greenmagick is offline  
#6 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 01:28 AM
 
sweetsunshine85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: on a mole hill in the woods! ;)
Posts: 2,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
  • “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)
  • “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)
  • “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)

bellycast.gifI am the Goddess, I am the Mother, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals.dust.gif
sweetsunshine85 is offline  
#7 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 01:29 AM
 
sweetsunshine85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: on a mole hill in the woods! ;)
Posts: 2,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am not trying to be controversial or cause a fight, but I had to memorize these quotes in school, so I am familiar with them.

bellycast.gifI am the Goddess, I am the Mother, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals.dust.gif
sweetsunshine85 is offline  
#8 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 02:07 AM
 
mamabadger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiij View Post
What evidence is there that the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ founded/meant to found?
Historically, there are only a few churches still existing which go back to the time of the apostles: the Roman Catholic and related Catholic churches; the Orthodox church; and the Coptic church. This is important only if you accept the idea that Christ's Church, once founded, would continue to exist intact until the end of the world.
mamabadger is offline  
#9 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 09:56 AM - Thread Starter
 
kimiij's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for all the responses! I am still trying to do research and wrap my head around the link between Peter and what eventually became the Roman Catholic Church? I think this is the question that for me is probably easier to see in history. But, I guess I'm not sure that I think it's all that important because through one way or another Peter founded the WHOLE Christian Church, not just the Catholic Church.

But, I can't for the life of me understand the salvation alone through the Roman Catholic Church because that''s not what's in the bible.

Romans 10:9-10, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

Romans 10:13, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."
kimiij is offline  
#10 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 10:02 AM
 
EFmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think you would do well to read widely on these topics, from both the Catholic and the non-Catholic perspective, because the answers are going to vary hugely. Only you are going to be able to decide the answers to your questions based on the scholarly evidence.
EFmom is offline  
#11 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 02:17 PM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiij View Post
Thanks for all the responses! I am still trying to do research and wrap my head around the link between Peter and what eventually became the Roman Catholic Church? I think this is the question that for me is probably easier to see in history. But, I guess I'm not sure that I think it's all that important because through one way or another Peter founded the WHOLE Christian Church, not just the Catholic Church.

But, I can't for the life of me understand the salvation alone through the Roman Catholic Church because that''s not what's in the bible.

Romans 10:9-10, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

Romans 10:13, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."
This is a commonly misunderstood doctrine. It does not mean that all non-Catholics are not going to be saved. In fact, the Catholic Church teaches that it is entirely possible for Protestants, atheists, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and so on, to be saved. But, they are saved through the Church, even if they don't know it.

There is a lot of theology about what exactly the Church is. It is seen as much more objective than what most Protestant denominations say, but it doesn't comprise ONLY the visible parts we can see. For Protestants, usually the church is an invisible, spiritual entity. For Catholics, it has both invisible spiritual aspects and visible, institutional ones. (Much like human beings, who have both a body and soul.) Among the invisible elements are all the saved people. The Church seen as the institution through which God chooses to work. So that atheist who was saved, is indeed considered to be part of the Church.

A good metaphor is that we are all vines grafted to the Church, which receives its life through Christ, it's root and the source of it's being. When a person joins the Church they are grafted on through the sacrament of baptism. But others may also be grafted on, that we don't know about, through the action of God.

So, what is the difference, then, between someone non-Catholic who gets grafted on and someone who doesn't. Well, the official line is that they are not to blame for not joining the Church if they didn't know any. It could be that no one told them, or even that they could not see that it made sense. In that case they could be extended grace if they had lived according to what they did know. (But refusing to investigate more, or a "dishonest reason for not joining the Church wouldn't cut it.)

As far as why all the denominations that split off are not considered part of the Church. There are two reasons that this is considered to be the case, and not all groups are considered party to both.

One is a matter of authority - the group may have kept to true doctrine, but has rejected the authority of the Church - part of the visible part of the Church. Both the Orthodox and Catholic Churches feel that a legitimate authority is an important part of the institution of the Church, although they center the authority in different places. By rejecting that authority, they have moved out of the Church.

In the case of most of the Protestant churches, and the attitude of the Orthodox to the Catholic Church, is that they have moved outside of the Church not only by rejecting it's authority, but by rejecting true doctrine and substituting false doctrine.

I think the important point is the idea that the Church is both a visible and invisible institution. If it is only invisible as the Protestant view has it then it does not really make sense to talk about moving outside the Church. (Mind you, they do, for example many would say a person who denies Christ, or the Bible, is outside the invisible church. But that means that they actually do see the church as having a visible aspect - certain points of doctrine and a certain interpretation of the Bible.)

I'm curious about what it is you don't like about their services?

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#12 of 41 Old 07-03-2009, 04:33 PM
 
JollyGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Many quotes about the "Church" being the only path to salvation are speaking of the "Church" in a broader sense than just the Catholic Church. If the the "Church" refers to Jesus' hands and feet. Then references to the Church as the only path to salvation simply means that they believe the only path through salvation is through Jesus.

Also remember that when you see references to the Catholic Church there is a difference between a big C and a little c. Catholic church is usually often to reference the Roman Catholic Church. With a little c - catholic refers to a united or universal church and usually referes to a more broad deffination of the faithful (http://www.answers.com/topic/catholic). Which is why you will find the line "I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic church;..." in the apostles creed in many protestant churches.

Many faiths believe they are the only path to salvation. Basically if some other way will get the job done just as well why would you continue to practice that particular faith? Therefore many religious of many denominations believe that theirs is the only true or correct path. Because it gives their beliefs a feeling of legitimacy.

Mom to DS 4/24/03 and DD 4/17/06
JollyGG is online now  
#13 of 41 Old 07-04-2009, 03:39 AM
 
genifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In a land, far far away...
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
In fact, the Catholic Church teaches that it is entirely possible for Protestants, atheists, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and so on, to be saved. But, they are saved through the Church, even if they don't know it.
So many words here, and I think it is so simple. Its not thru the church that anyone is saved. Its only thru Christ. Im willing to say that Im not sure how or who is saved thru Christ alone but to me, its clear that its thru Christ alone. Its not the Church who died for our salvation, its Christ alone.

I think that the Church, like Bluegoat said, is invisible and visible. It includes all denominations, imho. Also imo, while talking about this stuff can be benificial, it detracts from the point of it all, and makes Christ a sort of backseat figure in all this... dont you think?

I think we sometimes try to figure all this out, I dont know, may be to help us make sense of it all, needing a way of defining our faith, when its perfectly ok and (Im learning) right to just believe in Jesus. There was a time a long time ago when I was cleaning a house for an elderly gentleman in a wheelchair, it was a paid side job and I was hoovering and praying about all sorts of stuff like this, bc I too wanted an nice and tidy box to put it all in, some kind of security within this faith of mine. All the Holy Spirit said to me 'What about Jesus alone?... What about Just Jesus?'... For some reason one thing that kept popping in my head alongside this thought were criminals in prison who had accepted Christ, what about those... what church do they belong to? The Prison Church? ... The Holy Spirit left me to just ponder that for the last seven or 8 years lol... never gave me a conclusive answer, as if that was just an example of the point He was trying to teach me.

Im sorry I go on like this.... I think Im *finally* coming to terms with these kinds of dilemmas that have come up in my faith walk. (also, billy and mandy is on in the background and forgoodnesssake!! it is so distracting and ...kind of funny...where's my train of thought?)..... Yeah, coming to terms with this stuff. I used to question...'What KIND of Christian am I then?!?!'

Im finally coming to terms with it all and maybe going on like this on a forum like this is my own outlet... so this is an answer to all my questions as much as it is a response to the op...


genifer is offline  
#14 of 41 Old 07-04-2009, 09:29 AM - Thread Starter
 
kimiij's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post
I'm curious about what it is you don't like about their services?
I realize I didn't answer this question.

I'm not a fan of liturgy. I am more of a free-worship type. Singing songs, praying my own prayers, etc.
kimiij is offline  
#15 of 41 Old 07-04-2009, 10:08 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiij View Post
I realize I didn't answer this question.

I'm not a fan of liturgy. I am more of a free-worship type. Singing songs, praying my own prayers, etc.
Hmm, well, a liturgy has a very specific purpose and reason for existing the way it does. The idea in the liturgy for the Mass, for example, is to a) make sure the people understand what the Eucharist is actually supposed to be and mean, both as a Church and as an individual, b) are as far as possible in the right sort of mental state to recieve it. As well, because the form is the same week to week, and many of the prayers, there is a lot of opportunity to gain a very intimate knowledge of them. It's rather like a kind of meditation, where you go deeper and deeper over time. And when that liturgy becomes very familiar, it becomes quite a comfort, the words can come back to you when you really need them.

You might find different styles of service at different churches, and of course the Catholic Church has other rites than the familiar Latin one.

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#16 of 41 Old 07-04-2009, 08:11 PM
 
mamabadger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genifer View Post
So many words here, and I think it is so simple. Its not thru the church that anyone is saved. Its only thru Christ. Im willing to say that Im not sure how or who is saved thru Christ alone but to me, its clear that its thru Christ alone. Its not the Church who died for our salvation, its Christ alone.

I think that the Church, like Bluegoat said, is invisible and visible. It includes all denominations, imho. Also imo, while talking about this stuff can be benificial, it detracts from the point of it all, and makes Christ a sort of backseat figure in all this... dont you think?
Probably the biggest difference between most Protestant denominations on the one hand, and the Catholic/Orthodox/Coptic denominations on the other, is their conception of what the Church is. We do not see the Church as an organization. To us, the Church is the mystical Body of Christ; it is a living thing, and we are like the cells of that body. Christ provides what we need spiritually through his Church. So, there is no question of being saved by the Church or being saved by Christ, because they are one and the same.

In the same way, we believe there can only be one Church, just as there is only one Christ.
mamabadger is offline  
#17 of 41 Old 07-05-2009, 06:04 AM
 
genifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In a land, far far away...
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Probably the biggest difference between most Protestant denominations on the one hand, and the Catholic/Orthodox/Coptic denominations on the other, is their conception of what the Church is. We do not see the Church as an organization. To us, the Church is the mystical Body of Christ; it is a living thing, and we are like the cells of that body. Christ provides what we need spiritually through his Church. So, there is no question of being saved by the Church or being saved by Christ, because they are one and the same.

In the same way, we believe there can only be one Church, just as there is only one Christ.

Im really sorry mamabadger but when you say 'we' are you talking about the Catholic/Orthodox/Coptic denominations or Protestant denoms? And when you say that, does that include the 'other' as being part of the same invisible/mystic church, or are they considered heretics?? I can see what you mean tho, bc it says that Christ is the head... and my head IS part of my body so... it follows on, lol. And if you are talking about the Catholic/etc church, I totally have always seen that particular church as an organisation/institution. But thats just me, lol. THE biggest religious 'institution' out there. But then again, I dont know a whole lot about the Orthodox/coptic church. WHAT a variety within christianity tho, lol.

Saying that, I still see Christ as The Head but at the same time distinctly seperate in that the church didnt die for us. However, now that I say that... I can see how we DO die to our selves everyday.... for the sake of the gospel.... like Christ did... but I still see it kind of like 'us' and 'Him'.
genifer is offline  
#18 of 41 Old 07-05-2009, 01:44 PM
 
mamabadger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genifer View Post
Im really sorry mamabadger but when you say 'we' are you talking about the Catholic/Orthodox/Coptic denominations or Protestant denoms?
Oh, sorry. By "we" I meant the Orthodox/Catholic/Coptic part.
Quote:
And when you say that, does that include the 'other' as being part of the same invisible/mystic church, or are they considered heretics??
No, the "other" would not be part of the one Church. The same Church does not contain an essential belief about God or Christ, and at the same time contain another belief which contradicts it. The word "heretics" is considered terribly harsh by modern standards, but strictly speaking, any belief at odds with Church doctrine is heresy, meaning it belongs to some belief system apart from the Church.
Quote:
Saying that, I still see Christ as The Head but at the same time distinctly seperate in that the church didnt die for us.
No, Christ died for us; however, he is no longer physically present on earth; but before he returned to Heaven, he left the Church as his means of guiding and caring for us. We do not get to deal with Christ more directly than that until after our death.
mamabadger is offline  
#19 of 41 Old 07-05-2009, 02:00 PM
 
Lillitu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As information for you: I am not Catholic, but am a theologian and religious historian who claims no alliance to any Christian faith.

1. Jesus did not found the Catholic church or ANY Christian faith. He was a Jew and never considered himself anything but. Subsequent disciples and devotees founded the Christian faith, separate from Judaism.

2. The Catholic Church has no more claim on "the one true way" than any other religion. Frankly, I find religions that claim this suspect. There are many ways to the divine, and organized religions are a human making, not one of any Deity.

Mama to a 3 year old awesome kid, Rowan (aka Mister Boopy) and TTC another at 43!


fambedsingle1.gif gd.gifnovaxnocirc.gif vbac.gif goorganic.jpg

Herbalist, Acupuncture student, Mama, Blogger!

Lillitu is offline  
#20 of 41 Old 07-05-2009, 06:00 PM
 
mamabadger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lillitu View Post
1. Jesus did not found the Catholic church or ANY Christian faith. He was a Jew and never considered himself anything but. Subsequent disciples and devotees founded the Christian faith, separate from Judaism.
That can be true only if you completely disallow written accounts of his life. Christian scripture indicates that Jesus made numerous references to the founding of his Church, such as "I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." (Matthew 16:18)
He established new practices such as baptism; and even some which were completely scandalous to the Jews of the time: "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:53-54)
He directly contradicted, or rather corrected, Jewish teachings. (Matthew 5)
He gave his apostles instructions on what to do with his teachings: "As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." (John 20:21), "Whatever sins you forgive, they are forgiven; whatever sins you retain, they are retained." (John 20:22-23), "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:19-20)
He discussed what would happen to the followers of his teachings (his church) after his death: "You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. And the gospel must first be preached to all nations." (Mark 13:10), "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." (John 14:26)
How can statements like this indicate that he had no plans to establish a church and no intentions to make any changes whatsoever in Jewish teaching or practice?
mamabadger is offline  
#21 of 41 Old 07-05-2009, 09:15 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
The Catholic Church can trace it's roots and history back to Peter the Apostle.
The Protestant response to this is that this is a) not true, or at least not meaningful, in the sense that Catholics claim, and b) not indicative that Christ therefore founded that church.

According to the law of identity, a thing is defined by its attributes. The written teachings of Christ and the apostles (ie. the New Testament, which all conservative Christians, Protestant or Catholic, would at least agree would not contradict their oral teachings) do not contain many doctrines which are today defining attributes of Catholicism, such as Mary-related doctrines, doctrines about the Pope and priesthood, etc. Indeed, I believe that the New Testament directly contradicts much Catholic teaching, and that Peter and co. would have been considered heretics by modern Catholics and vice versa. Catholics would obviously disagree with me there, but IIRC they do hold to the "development of doctrine" belief, which is an admission that "Catholics" like Peter did not believe many of the same doctrines, either at all or to the same extent, that Catholics today believe.

Given that, "Jesus founded the Catholic Church" must at most be read as "Jesus founded a Church which was markedly different in doctrine and practice from the Catholic Church today, but which turned into it over time". Referring to Jesus, Peter or any of the early Christians as "Catholic" is therefore misleading without that caveat.

Then you have to ask what is meant by "the early church developed into the Catholic Church". After all, I could equally claim that the early church turned into the Reformed Baptist church - it did, in the sense that there were always believers who believed a variety of things, some of which at some periods of history corresponded with what later became popularly known as the Reformed Baptist faith. In that sense, I suppose there's continuity of sorts. (But Reformed Baptists don't tend to care when a doctrine was developed/formalized/popularized, if it is clear it was originally taught in Scripture - being twisted or lost for 1000 years doesn't make a teaching any less true or less "founded by Christ".)

Similarly, the Early Fathers believed all sorts of things, more or less heretical, some of which are very modern-Catholic in flavour and some of which are downright Protestant - and many of which contradict each other, the Early Fathers being by no means a unified front. Picking out certain doctrines and certain quotes from certain members of the early church and labelling them "Catholic", with the rest discarded as heretics, can provide the illusion of continuity and unification which history does not support. It's revisionist and selective.

Ultimately much of the division between Protestantism and Catholicism comes down to authority and truth. Protestants believe that, say, the early Church was authoritative in the matter of ratifying the canon inasmuch as it was true; Catholics believe that we can know the canon is correct because the early Church had authority. Protestants believe that the doctrine of, say, sola gratia is authoritative because it is true, as determined from Scripture; Catholics believe that the doctrine of, say, the the immaculate conception is true because it is taught by the Church, which is authoritative. So a lot of dialogue between Protestants and Catholics ends up missing the mark: saying, sans Church authority, "The Bible says X" to a Catholic is an unconvincing to him as saying to a Protestant "The Catholic Church teaches X" is unconvincing to him. Different presuppositions.

So I'd suggest the really important question to ask yourself, if wavering between Protestantism and Catholicism, is "which presuppositions do I believe, and why?" Do you believe that the Bible can be understood by people like you, or that it requires a Magesterium to interpret it; and why? Do you believe that Jesus gave infallible teaching authority to members of a specific denomination, or not; and why? Do you believe the teachings of the Church today are in accord with Scripture or not; and why? Do you believe the Pope has authority/sits in the seat of Peter, or not; and why?

If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#22 of 41 Old 07-06-2009, 03:05 AM
 
genifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In a land, far far away...
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Smokering.. You rock. I love how you picked it all apart and put it all back together again in a way that makes perfect sense.

genifer is offline  
#23 of 41 Old 07-06-2009, 10:05 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genifer View Post
Im really sorry mamabadger but when you say 'we' are you talking about the Catholic/Orthodox/Coptic denominations or Protestant denoms? And when you say that, does that include the 'other' as being part of the same invisible/mystic church, or are they considered heretics?? I can see what you mean tho, bc it says that Christ is the head... and my head IS part of my body so... it follows on, lol. And if you are talking about the Catholic/etc church, I totally have always seen that particular church as an organisation/institution. But thats just me, lol. THE biggest religious 'institution' out there. But then again, I dont know a whole lot about the Orthodox/coptic church. WHAT a variety within christianity tho, lol.

Saying that, I still see Christ as The Head but at the same time distinctly seperate in that the church didnt die for us. However, now that I say that... I can see how we DO die to our selves everyday.... for the sake of the gospel.... like Christ did... but I still see it kind of like 'us' and 'Him'.

There are different ways of using the word heretic, some can be looser than others. When it is being applied to an idea, it is fairly clear, if the idea differs from the doctrine the Church says is true, then the idea is heretical.

However, the person who held the idea might not be a heretic. For example, some of the ideas of the very early theologian Origen were later declared heretical. He was dead by that time, and so was given no blame, since there was no way he could have anticipated the later understanding.

As well, although the Orthodox Church considers the Catholic Church to be heretical, or the Catholics consider that Martin Luther was a heretic, members of those groups aren't all considered to be heretics. In the context of an individual, usually they are only considered a heretic if they were a member of the Church and broke away. A person brought up a Lutheran isn't a heretic in that sense, though one might say that the person holds heretical views.

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#24 of 41 Old 07-06-2009, 10:12 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
According to the law of identity, a thing is defined by its attributes.
That's a sticky proposition, though as I understand it, it isn't what the law of identity says. What do you mean by it's attributes? And are the attributes what make the thing what it is? (That seems quite clearly false.)
Would you say then, that we have no access to the substance of things, for example the substance of the Divine?

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#25 of 41 Old 07-06-2009, 07:41 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Ok, sloppily worded. I'm referring to this type of formulation: "Whatever is true in one form of words, is true in every other form of words, which conveys the same meaning". The average joe, hearing the words "Catholic Church", thinks of the institution defined by certain attributes - adherence to particular creeds, submission to the authority of the Pope, veneration of Mary and other saints, a certain hierarchical structure with priests, bishops etc. Clearly this is not the same as the early church; so one has to be very careful about using the term "Catholic" to apply to a group with very little resemblance to, and even opposing, the attributes of the Catholic Church today. I know some use the term "proto-Catholic", but even that's rather a loaded phrase, just as if I referred to the early church as "proto-Reformed" (which, theologically, I believe I'd have some basis for doing).

If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#26 of 41 Old 07-07-2009, 12:00 AM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 18,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
:

mamabadger is saying it far better than I ever could so I would just let her continue.

The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
#27 of 41 Old 07-07-2009, 11:11 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
Ok, sloppily worded. I'm referring to this type of formulation: "Whatever is true in one form of words, is true in every other form of words, which conveys the same meaning". The average joe, hearing the words "Catholic Church", thinks of the institution defined by certain attributes - adherence to particular creeds, submission to the authority of the Pope, veneration of Mary and other saints, a certain hierarchical structure with priests, bishops etc. Clearly this is not the same as the early church; so one has to be very careful about using the term "Catholic" to apply to a group with very little resemblance to, and even opposing, the attributes of the Catholic Church today. I know some use the term "proto-Catholic", but even that's rather a loaded phrase, just as if I referred to the early church as "proto-Reformed" (which, theologically, I believe I'd have some basis for doing).
I think that the theology of what the church is should not depend on what the average joe says. The question is what does God say it is.

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#28 of 41 Old 07-07-2009, 01:34 PM
 
shanniesue2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: walking my path
Posts: 1,543
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm a former Catholic (although not anti-Catholic), had 12 years of Catholic school and my family was (still is very devout). Here's what I learned about salvation as it relates to the Church:

The Catholic Church is not the only way to salvation. There is Truth found in other churches/denominations, but the Catholic Church is the only church in which you can find the fullness of Truth (the whole truth).

(I don't personally believe this, but this is what I was taught growing up)

mommy to Christopher 2/29/08
shanniesue2 is offline  
#29 of 41 Old 07-07-2009, 06:25 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
I think that the theology of what the church is should not depend on what the average joe says. The question is what does God say it is.
...Yes, but how does that interact with my OP in this thread?

If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#30 of 41 Old 07-08-2009, 11:11 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
...Yes, but how does that interact with my OP in this thread?
In order to assess what the Church is, or what it is supposed to be, it is simply not as simple as "Does it look the same as it did in the 1st century." What is the essence of the Church? What did the church, perhaps, believe itself to be in the 1st century. What has it claimed to be since then? What does scripture say?

Whether each individual doctrine or practice present at the beginning exists now is not an essential element, in that I know of no church, Protestant or otherwise that does not have a theory of doctrinal development.

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off