One True Church

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='reyb' post='1296514' date='Jun 16 2007, 06:23 AM']So your church believe in the Holy Trinity. Do your church have a declaration of faith like the catechism of Roman Catholic Church?[/quote]

Not like the Catechism no, as the Catechism is frequently updated and changed.

[Budge]

Mar 9:38 ¶ And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

Mar 9:40 [b]For he that is not against us is on our part.[/b]

THis shows that there is no one true church..

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Budge' post='1296537' date='Jun 16 2007, 07:43 AM']Mar 9:38 ¶ And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

Mar 9:40 [b]For he that is not against us is on our part.[/b]

THis shows that there is no one true church..[/quote]

I guess I don't see what you see Budge... give me your exegesis of it.

[Budge]

[quote]he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.[/quote]

Think about it...this guy was NOT following the apostles...personally...

[SJP]

[quote name='Budge' post='1296537' date='Jun 16 2007, 10:43 AM']Mar 9:38 ¶ And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

Mar 9:40 [b]For he that is not against us is on our part.[/b]

THis shows that there is no one true church..[/quote]


Far from it Budge. I think that you've come to an erroneous conclusion.

Jesus says: [quote]for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.[/quote]

So we have to conclude that the man who worked the miracle was indeed of Christ. However, how does this prove that the man was not also a part of the one true Church? We cannot conclude from the text that the man knowingly rejected the Apostles of Christ. Perhpas he was unaware of who they were, maybe he did not trust them at the time, perhaps Christ had other plans for him, perhaps the man joined the Apostles at a later date, maybe the man was not called to do the work of the Apostles, or perhaps he was not yet prepared.

These are all legitimate possibilities

In any event your conclusion does not follow.

Edited June 16, 2007 by SJP

[Katholikos]

[quote name='reyb' post='1296493' date='Jun 16 2007, 06:49 AM'][indent]I am referring to the letters written by the church and it was the NT Books, I thought there are other books. Yes in the back of Catechism there are so many abbr that I do not understand. Please bear me on this. TY[/indent][/quote]

reyb,

Thank you for clarifying this. I think you must be referring to what is called the "New Testament Apocrypha," the large body of writings that circulated among the early Churches but which the Church excluded from the New Testament when it was formed at the end of the fourth century. All of those writings are available on line. Just google 'New Testament Apocrypha.'

I understand the feelings of confusion that anyone experiences who first looks into the Catholic Church. I went through it, too. Not to worry; we understand. Take baby steps. The Church is 2,000 years old, and that's a lot of history to wade through. Believe me, it's worth the effort. If we overwhelm you, just let us know. We're here to help.

There are conflicting voices and messages. This is a great scandal in Christianity, which turns many people away. It turned me away, and I eventually became an atheist because of it. Many years later, I found the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. The Orthodox (such as Reza) and the Protestants (such as Budge) will try to convince you that the Catholic Church is false. They're like children who left home and now speak ill of their Mother. It will take time for you to sort it all out, but Jesus Christ founded only one Church -- and that is the Catholic Church, built upon the Rock of Peter.

Likos

[Katholikos]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1296517' date='Jun 16 2007, 08:32 AM']Not like the Catechism no, as the Catechism is frequently updated and changed.[/quote]

The Orthodox have no catechism of similar statement of belief because the Orthodox Churches are divided -- split up into various ethnic and nationalistic entities and nothing or no one ties them together. One is either Russian Orthodox, or Greek Orthodox, or Ukrainian Orthodox, or Ethiopian Orthodox, and so on. They are separate entities. The Russian patriarch (head of the Russian Orthodox Church) speaks only to and for the ROC (Russian Orthodox Church), The Greek patriarch speaks only to and for the Greek Orthodox Church, etc.

Catholic means universal. The Catechism applies to all Catholics everywhere. The Pope speaks for and to all Catholics in the entire world, regardless of which of the 23 rites (or Churches) that make up the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church they may belong. God bless Benedict XVI!

Pray for the reunification of the One Undivided Church!

Likos

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Katholikos' post='1296787' date='Jun 16 2007, 12:29 PM']The Orthodox have no catechism of similar statement of belief because the Orthodox Churches are divided -- split up into various ethnic and nationalistic entities and nothing or no one ties them together.[/quote] Yet another ignorant statement that has no historical or otherwise truth. The Roman Catholic Church has "ethnic" entities [which you previously claimed you never even used the word "ethnic"] and Nationalistic Entities. What do you call Melkites, Chaldean, Coptic Catholic, etc? Those are Ethnic and Nationalistic entities, no different then Russian Orthodox in Eastern Orthodoxy. We can even find this throughout the Bible, when St. Paul addresses the different churches of particular cultures.

However, you're very misleading and deceitful, when you attempt to make the connection that those national and ethnic differences empower a particular people. When the Apostles converted people of different cultures, they didn't force them to abandon their culture, but conform it to the truth of Jesus Christ. Even the Roman Catholic Church involves a culture and nationalistic entity. Second, you're neglecting the Pre-Schism Church by forgetting that these "Ethnic and Nationalistic Entities" [as you claim they are] were founded by the Apostles themselves, as St. Mark founded the Egyptian Church, St. Thomas the Indian Church, etc.

[quote]One is either Russian Orthodox, or Greek Orthodox, or Ukrainian Orthodox, or Ethiopian Orthodox, and so on. They are separate entities. The Russian patriarch (head of the Russian Orthodox Church) speaks only to and for the ROC (Russian Orthodox Church), The Greek patriarch speaks only to and for the Greek Orthodox Church, etc. [/quote]Just as Cyril Maker speaks for the Coptic Catholic Church [which is connected to the Roman Catholic Church], etc. This is a very ignorant statement with a total dismissal for the Pre-Schism Church.

[quote]Catholic means universal. The Catechism applies to all Catholics everywhere. The Pope speaks for and to all Catholics in the entire world, regardless of which of the 23 rites (or Churches) that make up the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church they may belong. God bless Benedict XVI![/quote] It also keeps changing too and getting "updated" [if that's what you'd like to call it], and even changing it's tradition from time to time.

[quote]Pray for the reunification of the One Undivided Church!

Likos[/quote]

I definately believe we should, but we should also have a sound interpretation of history. Your claims about Orthodoxy as so distorted and lacking a sense of history, that they are misleading and slanderous, contributing to the divisions in the Pre-Schism Church.

Reza

[Lord Philip]

So Reyb,

Do you have any questions concerning the Catholic Church? I am curious to know what reasons you have for not being Catholic (forgive me, I am assuming you are not Catholic even though you have nowhere said so...but I think it is a fair assumption given this disclaimer).

I really would like to know.

God bless,

Philip

P.S. Gentlemen, perhaps in this thread we ought to refrain from issues that divide the Apostolic Churches. Just a suggestion.

[Budge]

[quote]So we have to conclude that the man who worked the miracle was indeed of Christ. However, how does this prove that the man was not also a part of the one true Church?[/quote]

He was part of the ekklesia, the only CHURCH that counts.

Your interpreation makes no sense because the apostles didnt even know him.

[SJP]

[quote name='Budge' post='1298586' date='Jun 19 2007, 06:10 PM']He was part of the ekklesia, the only CHURCH that counts.

Your interpreation makes no sense because the apostles didnt even know him.[/quote]

Your interpretation requires that one had to personally know the Apostles in order to be a member of the Church, and that's obviously not the case.

[quote]Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

Mar 9:40 For he that is not against us is on our part.[/quote]

I"ll repeat: we have to conclude that the man who worked the miracle was indeed of Christ. However, how does this prove that the man was not also a part of the one true Church? We cannot conclude from the text that the man knowingly rejected the Apostles of Christ. Perhpas he was unaware of who they were, maybe he did not trust them at the time, perhaps Christ had other plans for him, perhaps the man joined the Apostles at a later date, maybe the man was not called to do the work of the Apostles, or perhaps he was not yet prepared.

These are all legitimate possibilities

In any event your conclusion does not follow.

[Budge]

[quote]Your interpretation requires that one had to personally know the Apostles in order to be a member of the Church, and that's obviously not the case.[/quote]

Doesnt your church teach that one has to be following and receiving sacraments from the supposed "SUCCESSORS to the APOSTLES" to be a legitimate member of the church?

in other words KNOW or at least DEAL with an "apostle" every now and then?

[SJP]

[quote name='Budge' post='1298595' date='Jun 19 2007, 06:23 PM']Doesnt your church teach that one has to be following and receiving sacraments from the supposed "SUCCESSORS to the APOSTLES" to be a legitimate member of the church?

in other words KNOW or at least DEAL with an "apostle" every now and then?[/quote]


No, it doesn't.

We just discussed this in the Anonymous Christian thread:

Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."[62]Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity."

[reyb]

[quote name='Lord Philip' post='1298518' date='Jun 19 2007, 02:37 PM']So Reyb,

Do you have any questions concerning the Catholic Church? I am curious to know what reasons you have for not being Catholic (forgive me, I am assuming you are not Catholic even though you have nowhere said so...but I think it is a fair assumption given this disclaimer).

I really would like to know.

God bless,

Philip

P.S. Gentlemen, perhaps in this thread we ought to refrain from issues that divide the Apostolic Churches. Just a suggestion.[/quote]
[indent]I was once a Catholic. My Mother and Grandmother are deeply devoted Catholics because my grandfather (my grandmother's brother) is a priest. While my grandfather in my father side is the founder of protestant church called - Church of Christ The Disciple - .But now, I do not consider myself a Catholic because I am unfit to be called catholic because, I do not understand and accept so many teachings about the Roman Catholic Church. For almost 14 years, I was not a member of any Church you may possiby know. Hence, I am here trying to understand the teaching of the Church[/indent]

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='reyb' post='1299419' date='Jun 21 2007, 07:56 AM'][indent]I was once a Catholic. My Mother and Grandmother are deeply devoted Catholics because my grandfather (my grandmother's brother) is a priest. While my grandfather in my father side is the founder of protestant church called - Church of Christ The Disciple - .But now, I do not consider myself a Catholic because I am unfit to be called catholic because, I do not understand and accept so many teachings about the Roman Catholic Church. For almost 14 years, I was not a member of any Church you may possiby know. Hence, I am here trying to understand the teaching of the Church[/indent][/quote]

Dear Reyb,

I can certainly understand how so many things about Catholicism become confusing. I admire you for actually engaging in conversation about these things: that is a rare quality.

I was raised in Protestant home and there I learned to love the Lord, to read the Scriptures, and to pray to our Lord Jesus Christ. I am so thankful for that upbringing since it provided the foundation of what my faith is today. Yet after a little while I was confronted with serious questions, philosophical inconsistencies, and a dissatisfaction with modern Christianity. I read the Early Church Fathers and could not in good conscience remain a Protestant any longer.

I would love to go into more detail about this with you. You said you do not understand certain Catholic teachings, and that you do not accept others. May I ask what these are? Believe me, I had to wrestle with so many issues in moving from Protestantism to Catholicism. I would love to discuss some of them with you.

Honestly, though, the main issue that settled all the others was coming to terms with the authority of the Church. Once I realized that Christ ordained his Apostles and promised to lead them into all truth, and that these Apostles appointed Bishops, and those Bishops appointed other Bishops all the way down to our present day, I knew that these men had authority to teach the Word of God that superceded my personal interpretations of Scripture. In opening myself to humility and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it was then that I began to see that what these men, guided by the Holy Spirit, taught was true.

I reccommend, Reyb, that you make a visit to your local priest as well. He should be able to give a voice to many of the issues that you are confronting.

God bless you, Reyb, and I will pray for you as you continue your journey of faith. Remember, I am eager to discuss!

Farewell,

Philip Wilson