The Early Church is the Catholic Church

[Hieronymus]

I thought RCC wasn't there before the 4th (5th?) century...

 

[Arsenios]

Can you provide any evidence that the descriptive word indicated the forming of a new Church?

That is not her raging issue -

Catholic, like Orthodox, is a descriptive...

Lutheran is a NAME Church...

To the ancients, it was the Greek Church and the Latin Church...

Did I mention the Coptic Church?

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

I thought RCC wasn't there before the 4th (5th?) century...

That was when the Roman Empire moved it HQ to Constantinople...

But it is a good question:

When did the Church at Rome first use the name: Roman Catholic Church?

My guess is around the 10th century, but I could be wrong...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

I guess I'm doing okay, how are you? Sorry I don't remember what forum we were last on together but I don't think it was here was it? I have not been here in a few years.

TOL?

Or was it on Carl Conrad's Bible Greek site?

You would have known me by my pre-Baptismal name...

Arsenios

 

[Meowzltov]

Point 1: In the early Church of Christ were women deaconesses, priestesses, and female apostles. Junia is a good example for it.

Women were certainly deaconesses in the Early Church, although exactly what that meant is still being discerned by scholars. Priests? I don't think so.

Apostles? The verse about Junia/Junias is very ambiguous and can't really be used. For one thing, the original texts did not use accents, meaning we don't know if there was a circumflex accent following the last syllable. Why does that matter? It makes the difference whether the name is Junia (female) or Junias (male). Indeed, modern Bible translations are pretty much split 50-50 over whether to translate it as Junia or Junias.

Then there are two issues about Andronicus and Junia/Junias being "of note among the Apostles." The first issue is that it doesn't actually imply that they are apostles. It merely states that they had a good reputation among the apostles. (This is what I go with.)

The second issue is that some scholars argue that there seems to be a two tiered system of apostles. There are THE Aposltes, the twelve disciples. And then there is an office of apostles (lower case) that any Christian can aspire to be, as in "the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers."

 

[ToBeLoved]

It doesn't matter what they called it, it was the same Church.

The word was just a description of the Church.

Can you provide any evidence that the descriptive word indicated the forming of a new Church?

Some of the Apostles were married as I believe Peter was, so how do you explain priests being not married? Did they just make that one up? And look at how many problems this has caused. God does not want people lusting after others.

 

[samir]

Some of the Apostles were married as I believe Peter was, so how do you explain priests being not married?

Some Catholic priests are married. Try again.

Some of the Apostles condemned eating meat with blood, so how do you explain your congregation teaching that eating blood is okay?

Did your congregation just make that one up?

 

[samir]

When did the Church at Rome first use the name: Roman Catholic Church?

My guess is around the 10th century, but I could be wrong...

Arsenios

Right after the schism sounds about right. They wanted those schismatics to know it was necessary to submit to Rome to be part of the Catholic Church.

 

[prodromos]

Some of the Apostles were married as I believe Peter was, so how do you explain priests being not married? Did they just make that one up? And look at how many problems this has caused. God does not want people lusting after others.

When you compare the numbers of cases of abuse in the Catholic Church to the numbers of cases in Protestant Churches and also among those who don't belong to any Church, the percentages don't change. Thus it is not a valid argument to lay blame on the Catholic requirement in the Latin rite for celibate priests. You can certainly find fault with how they have handled those abuses, bug that is all.

 

[Arsenios]

Right after the schism sounds about right.

So if we are right, the name: "Roman Catholic Church" did not exist prior to the Great Schism...

And I am trying to remember if ANY Orthodox Catholic Church called itself, say, the Constantinoplotan Catholic Church, or the Alexandrian Catholic Church, or the Jerusalem Catholic Church... And none ever did, in the entire first thousand years of the history of Christianity on earth...

It was always "The Church at Rome", or the Church at Thessalonica, or the Jerusalem Church, or the Alexandrian Church...

They wanted those schismatics to know it was necessary to submit to Rome to be part of the Catholic Church.

The Orthodox Church at the time of the Schism was comprised of 5 Sees:
Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem,

Only ONE of these 5 stepped away from Communion with the other 4...

THAT ONE SCHISMATIC SEE was the Roman See...

The rest all maintained their one Communion...

And they all DENIED Communion to Rome for her Apostasy...

And the ONE Church that separated Herself from ALL the others...
Then snarled that the REST
Who maintained their historic Communion...
That THEY were all Schismatics...

When a single one departs from the whole...
And claims to be the whole...
That one is no longer in the Communion of the whole...

And THAT has been the case now for a thousand years...
The Latins still insisting that their Bishop
Is the Head of the Body of Christ on earth...
When Christ is the ONLY Head of His Own Body on earth...

Matt 20:25-28
But Jesus called them unto him, and said,
Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles
exercise dominion over them,
and they that are great
exercise authority upon them.

The Pope in his thirst for authority over others is, you see,
seeking to reduce himself to being a worldly prince...

But it shall not be so among you:
but whosoever will be great among you,
let him be your servant;
And whosoever will be chief among you,
let him be your slave:

This Rome refuses to do...

Even as the Son of man
came not to be served,
but to serve,
and to give his soul
as a ransom for many.

The result is the loss of Christ's Grace
And the gaining of that of the Roman Pontiff...

And still She persists in Her authoritarian quest...
Wanting all the rest to kiss his feet...

A childish delusion gone global...

Schism is Anathema...
Rome needs to repent...
And to return...
To be UNDER the Communion
OVER which She now desires to RULE

Arsenios

 

[StanJ]

And I am trying to remember if ANY Orthodox Catholic Church called itself, say, the Constantinoplotan Catholic Church, or the Alexandrian Catholic Church, or the Jerusalem Catholic Church... And none ever did, in the entire first thousand years of the history of Christianity on earth...
It was always "The Church at Rome", or the Church at Thessalonica, or the Jerusalem Church, or the Alexandrian Church...
The Orthodox Church at the time of the Schism was comprised of 5 Sees:
Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem,
Only ONE of these 5 stepped away from Communion with the other 4...
THAT ONE SCHISMATIC SEE was the Roman See...

Why didn't you include the Ethiopian Orthodox Church here? They were founded at least 600 years before the great schism. From what I've read there would have been more Christians in Ethiopia then they were in Jerusalem Antioch and Alexandria combined. No I'm not sure because I've only read small tidbits about it but you seem to have a lot more knowledge in your head then I do about this issue?

 

[Arsenios]

Why didn't you include the Ethiopian Orthodox Church here? They were founded at least 600 years before the great schism. From what I've read there would have been more Christians in Ethiopia then they were in Jerusalem Antioch and Alexandria combined. No I'm not sure because I've only read small tidbits about it but you seem to have a lot more knowledge in your head then I do about this issue?

Ethiopia kind of disappeared from the world historical scene around the 4th century, and re-appeared a thousand years later, with the Faith the same as all the other Apostolic Churches... She is a part of the Coptic Church now, and they and the Oriental Orthodox Churches are very close to being in Communion once again... Finding what they split over is problematic, and appears to almost be linguistic...

Arsenios

 

[StanJ]

Ethiopia kind of disappeared from the world historical scene around the 4th century, and re-appeared a thousand years later, with the Faith the same as all the other Apostolic Churches... She is a part of the Coptic Church now, and they and the Oriental Orthodox Churches are very close to being in Communion once again... Finding what they split over is problematic, and appears to almost be linguistic...

Well at least they had the distinction of being mentioned in Acts 8. Obviously that one was very familiar with Old Testament scripture.
I've seen a few shows and read a few things on the fact that they are purported to have some of the oldest manuscripts in existence. The problem is they won't admit it or deny it.

 

[samir]

So if we are right, the name: "Roman Catholic Church" did not exist prior to the Great Schism...

And I am trying to remember if ANY Orthodox Catholic Church called itself, say, the Constantinoplotan Catholic Church, or the Alexandrian Catholic Church, or the Jerusalem Catholic Church... And none ever did, in the entire first thousand years of the history of Christianity on earth...

It was always "The Church at Rome", or the Church at Thessalonica, or the Jerusalem Church, or the Alexandrian Church...

That's because there was only one church prior to the schism. There was no need to refer to the Catholic Church as the Roman Catholic Church until a group of people who refused to submit to Rome claimed that they were the Catholic Church. Since two churches claimed to be the Catholic Church after the schism there was need for a distinction to avoid confusion. Since Rome considered those who submit to Rome to be the Catholic Church it made sense to refer to it as the Roman Catholic Church.

The Orthodox Church at the time of the Schism was comprised of 5 Sees:
Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem,

Only ONE of these 5 stepped away from Communion with the other 4...

THAT ONE SCHISMATIC SEE was the Roman See...

The rest all maintained their one Communion...

And they all DENIED Communion to Rome for her Apostasy...

And the ONE Church that separated Herself from ALL the others...
Then snarled that the REST
Who maintained their historic Communion...
That THEY were all Schismatics...

When a single one departs from the whole...
And claims to be the whole...
That one is no longer in the Communion of the whole...

And THAT has been the case now for a thousand years...
The Latins still insisting that their Bishop
Is the Head of the Body of Christ on earth...
When Christ is the ONLY Head of His Own Body on earth...

Matt 20:25-28
But Jesus called them unto him, and said,
Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles
exercise dominion over them,
and they that are great
exercise authority upon them.

The Pope in his thirst for authority over others is, you see,
seeking to reduce himself to being a worldly prince...

But it shall not be so among you:
but whosoever will be great among you,
let him be your servant;
And whosoever will be chief among you,
let him be your slave:

This Rome refuses to do...

Even as the Son of man
came not to be served,
but to serve,
and to give his soul
as a ransom for many.

The result is the loss of Christ's Grace
And the gaining of that of the Roman Pontiff...

And still She persists in Her authoritarian quest...
Wanting all the rest to kiss his feet...

A childish delusion gone global...

Schism is Anathema...
Rome needs to repent...
And to return...
To be UNDER the Communion
OVER which She now desires to RULE

Arsenios

Yes but the Roman Church is bigger than yours. Although it may have been 1 patriarch versus 4, there are 1 billion RCs versus 300 million Orthodox so you're outnumbered 3 to 1.

 

[Arsenios]

Yes but the Roman Church is bigger than yours.

Rome wasn't bigger when it became schizmatic...

Although it may have been 1 patriarch versus 4, there are 1 billion RCs versus 300 million Orthodox so you're outnumbered 3 to 1.

That is the result of your worldly and authoritarian rule that persecuted Her enemies...

We were persecuted by ours...

Your Jesuits were often agents in those persecutions...

You have the princely and worldly Church, and still seek the Communion we will not extend to you...

We have the persecuted and martyric Church...

And besides, by your logic, Islam should be the true Church, because they outnumber Christians by at least three to one...

A silly argument, yes?

Rome withdrew Herself from the Communion of the Christian Churches...
Thinking She should impose submission to Herself, which she did in the West...
Ireland, the Isle of Saints, producing hundreds each year,
produced only a handful after the Latin enforced takeover there
Even to this day and hour...

Your Pope does not get to replace Christ in OUR Church...
You are on your own with Papal Authoritarianism...
We chose to go under Islamic Rule in Constantinople...
Rather than submit to the Latin Power-Seeker...

Death rather than that evil submission...
And we are still finding martyric death in Syria...
And persecutions under the Islamic yoke...
Glory to God!

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Well at least they had the distinction of being mentioned in Acts 8. Obviously that one was very familiar with Old Testament scripture.
I've seen a few shows and read a few things on the fact that they are purported to have some of the oldest manuscripts in existence. The problem is they won't admit it or deny it.

Have you seen their beautiful hand-carved out of living rock Churches?
Their services and those from whom they were separated for a thousand years are virtually identical...
This Faith doesn't change - People in it do...

That is how it works...

Arsenios

 

[prodromos]

Yes but the Roman Church is bigger than yours. Although it may have been 1 patriarch versus 4, there are 1 billion RCs versus 300 million Orthodox so you're outnumbered 3 to 1.

So are you arguing for Islam now, based on the numbers?

 

[StanJ]

So are you arguing for Islam now, based on the numbers?

I think samir just likes to argue the contrary, regardless of what it is.

 

[samir]

I think samir just likes to argue the contrary, regardless of what it is.

It's boring to post that I agree when I think someone is right so I prefer to focus on topics where I disagree or am not sure because then I could learn something or teach someone else something.

 

[samir]

So are you arguing for Islam now, based on the numbers?

I was responding to the claim by Arsenios that the majority of patriarchs were against Rome. I don't think he was arguing for Islam.