Jesus on How to Choose a Church

[timothyu]

It wasn't invisible, just underground

 

[FireDragon76]

It wasn't invisible, just underground

That sounds even more like "conspiracy theory" to any serious historian.

 

[timothyu]

That sounds even more like "conspiracy theory" to any serious historian.

Most movements start below the radar

 

[Jamdoc]

“Thou are Rock (Peter), and upon this Rock I will build my Church." Matthew 16:18
That means you just need to find the Church that was built upon Peter. Remember too that the Catholic Church chose the 73 books of the Bible in a process that spanned centuries. No Catholic Church--no Bible. Also realize that the Bible is the book of the Catholic Church--not the other way around.

Jesus then turned around and called Peter Satan.

Peter is not the rock the church is built on, Jesus, and the profession of faith that Peter made is. Jesus' statement in Matthew 16 had 2 versions of the word "rock" a masculine for Peter (petros) and a feminine one for the one he'd build His church on (petra). Petros is a small rock, a pebble. petra is a large boulder. "Ye of little faith" Peter was not the boulder, but the small pebble.

 

[Valletta]

Jesus then turned around and called Peter Satan.

Peter is not the rock the church is built on, Jesus, and the profession of faith that Peter made is. Jesus' statement in Matthew 16 had 2 versions of the word "rock" a masculine for Peter (petros) and a feminine one for the one he'd build His church on (petra). Petros is a small rock, a pebble. petra is a large boulder. "Ye of little faith" Peter was not the boulder, but the small pebble.

The original Aramaic name given to Simon is preserved in the Biblical text, it is "Kepha" which means "Rock" in Aramaic. "Kepha" is transliterated into "Cephas." What Jesus said was "Thou art Rock and upon this Rock I will build My Church."

 

[timothyu]

The only true rock is truth from God but not from man. But of course we are expected by man to believe man's tradition over the truth from God.

 

[Valletta]

The only true rock is truth from God but not from man. But of course we are expected by man to believe man's tradition over the truth from God.

Our Lord renamed Simon as Rock. That is the Word of God, do not believe man's traditions over God's Word.

 

[The Liturgist]

The Papacy in the west was an historical development, so it's misleading to say it was the earliest church. Simply intellectually dishonest. Alot of aspects of the Papacy as anything but a bishopric around Rome rest on medieval forgeries.

If one were to want to delve into what the ancient Church looked like, all the evidence I've seen suggests it was probably closer to the Syriac churches, as they seem to retain many features of early Christianity.

That said, I would argue, as the last member on the forum at present who is active and has any substantial knowledge about the Syriac Orthodox and Assyrian churches, that these churches are very much like the Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox churches. Indeed, the Syriac Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox churches are so close together in all matters of doctrine and liturgy as to be three peas in a pod, and likewise, there is a strong family relationship between the Syriac and Armenian churches, and the Coptic and Ethiopian, and between the Syriac and Ethiopian, and between the Byzantine and Roman, and between the Byzantine and Coptic, and between the Roman and Anglican, so really, what it actually boils down to is the persecuted Syriac churches in the Middle East, which continue to be the victim of ethnic cleansing, aren’t radically different from any other Christian churches, but rather lie at the center of the liturgical continuum, especially in the case of the Syriac Orthodox, Syriac Catholic and pre-1960s Maronite Catholic churches (I wish someone would organize a Maronite-Rite Orthodox Church which would revive the old pre-Vatican II Maronite liturgy, which unlike the one they use today, was very close to the Syriac Orthodox liturgy in its ornate beauty, indeed sharing a massive amount of liturgical content with it, for the Maronites were actually a group that separated with the Syriac Orthodox on the basis of some doctrinal dispute the exact nature of which seems lost to history, before settling in Lebanon, which was actually a power move on the part of the Maronites, as it gave them a strategic holdout in the mountains, much like that also taken by the Druze religion, which allowed the Maronites and the Druze to flourish without fear of the frequent genocidal reprisals the Syriac Orthodox and other Middle Eastern Christians continued to endure from the arrival of Islam until the present.

It is also the case that in terms of preserving a broad range of traditional doctrinal positions on everything from the use of iconography (there has never been iconoclasm in the Syriac Orthodox or Maronite Catholic or Syriac Catholic churches), to the incarnational Christology, to the moral theology, the Syriac Orthodox are, or should be, extremely uncontroversial.

Indeed, there is a Syriac Orthodox jurisdiction in India not in communion with the Patriarch of Antioch, the Catholicos of India, or any of the other Oriental Orthodox patriarchates, the Malankara Independent Syrian Church, which is in full communion with the Mar Thoma Syrian Church, a Protestant church that is a member of the Anglican Communion.

 

[timothyu]

That is the Word of God

Which said in the previous passage the foundation was truth from God, not from man. Truth did not come from Peter but through Peter as it should in all of us. But since the Garden man has set ourselves up as pronouncers of truth, usually to of course aide our personal agendas and interests. Churches are no less guilty. God became a useful tool.

 

[Valletta]

Valleta: “Remember too that the Catholic Church chose the 73 books of the Bible in a process that spanned centuries. No Catholic Church--no Bible. Also realize that the Bible is the book of the Catholic Church--not the other way around.”

This isn’t true. The Gospels and the Epistles were written before the Catholic Church was organized. The Gospels were not commissioned by any organized body, although they were each products of a community of Christians. The Church accepted the Old Testament recognized by Jewish authorities.

False. Catholics met for mass before one word of the NT was written. Once the Gospels were written Catholics began to use those as readings at mass. During the life of Jesus on earth the Jews had different lists of OT books. Catholics chose a different list of OT books than the largest groups of Jews were using at the time of selection, saying those who had rejected Jesus had no authority to choose books. The Gospels were never "commissioned," the Catholic Church decided to determine what books were the Word of God and which books were not. The process spanned centuries.

 

[timothyu]

There was no universal church before it was universalized centuries after Jesus.

 

[Valletta]

There was no universal church before it was universalized centuries after Jesus.

". . . wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."​

CHURCH FATHERS: Epistle to the Smyrnaeans (St. Ignatius) Chapter 8 circa 110 A.D.

Chronological list of popes​

1st millennium​

1st century​

Popes of the 1st century

Pontiff number	Pontificate	Name: English · Latin	Date and Place of birth	Age at start/ end of papacy	Notes
1	30–33 / 64–68	St Peter PETRVS	AD 1 Bethsaida, Judaea, Roman Empire[birth 1]	29–32 / 62–67	Born as Shimon Bar Yonah, a Jewish from Judaea. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. First pope. Apostle of Jesus. According to Catholic tradition he received the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 16:18–19). Feast day (Feast of Saints Peter and Paul) 29 June. The Catholic Church recognizes him as the first Bishop of Rome appointed by Christ. Also revered as saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 29 June.[4] St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City is named after him.
2	64–68 / 76–79	St Linus LINVS	10 AD Volterrae, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 2]	54–58 / 66–69	First Roman pope, being a Roman citizen born in Italia, the homeland of the ancient Romans[birth 3] .[5] Feast day 23 September. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 7 June. Possibly mentioned in the New Testament (Second Epistle to Timothy 4:21).[6]
3	76–79 / 88–91	St Anacletus (Cletus) ANACLETVS (CLETVS)	25 AD Athenae, Achaea, Roman Empire[birth 4]	51–54 / 63–66	First Greek pope. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Feast day 26 April. Once erroneously split into Cletus and Anacletus.[7]
4	26 April 88 – 23 November 99 (11 years, 211 days)	St Clement I CLEMENS	c. 35 AD Roma, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 5]	53 / 64 (†66)	Roman citizen, born in the capital of the Roman Empire. Feast day 23 November. The earliest Apostolic Father, issued 1 Clement which is said to be the basis of apostolic authority for the clergy. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 25 November. Possibly mentioned in the New Testament (Epistle to the Philippians 4:3).[8] He was martyred by being tied to an anchor and being thrown in the sea.
5	23 November 99 – 27 October 105 (5 years, 338 days)	St Evaristus EVARISTVS	c. 30 AD Bethlehem, Iudaea, Roman Empire[birth 6]	69 / 75	Hellenized Jew. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Said to have divided Rome into parishes, assigning a priest to each. Feast day of 26 October.

2nd century​

Popes of the 2nd century

Pontiff number	Pontificate	Name: English · Latin	Date and Place of birth	Age at start/ end of papacy	Notes
6	27 October 105 – 3 May 115 (9 years, 188 days)	St Alexander I ALEXANDER	c. 75 AD Roma, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 5]	30 / 40	Roman citizen, born in the capital of the Roman Empire. Inaugurated the custom of blessing houses with holy water. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 18 March.
7	3 May 115 – 3 April 125 (9 years, 335 days)	St Sixtus I SYXTVS	42 AD Roma, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 5]	73 / 83	A Roman of Greek descent, born in Italia, the homeland of the ancient Romans. Uncertain if it was a peregrinus (a free subject of the Roman Empire) or a Roman citizen. Feast day of 6 April. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 10 August.
8	3 April 125 – 5 January 136 (10 years, 277 days)	St Telesphorus TELESPHORVS	c. 67 AD Terra Nova, Italia, Roman Empire	58 / 69	A Roman of Greek descent, born in Italia, the homeland of the ancient Romans. Uncertain if it was a peregrinus (a free subject of the Roman Empire) or a Roman citizen. Feast day of 5 January. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 22 February. Church Father St. Irenaeus called him a great martyr; the earliest attested martyrdom of pope after St. Peter.
9	5 January 136 – 11 January 140 (4 years, 6 days)	St Hyginus HYGINVS	c. 74 AD Athens, Achaea, Roman Empire[birth 4]	58 / 62	Greek. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Tradition holds he was martyred; feast day 11 January.
10	11 January 140 – 11 July 155 (15 years, 181 days)	St Pius I PIVS	c. 81 AD Aquileia, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 7]	59 / 74	Roman citizen, born in Italia, the homeland of the ancient Romans. Was brother of Hermas. Martyred by sword; feast day 11 July. Decreed that Easter should only be celebrated on a Sunday.
11	11 July 155 – 20 April 166 (10 years, 283 days)	St Anicetus ANICETVS	c. 92 AD Emesa, Syria, Roman Empire[birth 8]	63 / 74	Hellenized Syrian; first Syrian pope. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Tradition holds he was martyred; feast day 17 April. Decreed that priests are not allowed to have long hair.

List of popes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[timothyu]

Reverse engineered

 

[Valletta]

Reverse engineered

That's quite a conspiracy theory.

 

[FireDragon76]

That said, I would argue, as the last member on the forum at present who is active and has any substantial knowledge about the Syriac Orthodox and Assyrian churches, that these churches are very much like the Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox churches. Indeed, the Syriac Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox churches are so close together in all matters of doctrine and liturgy as to be three peas in a pod, and likewise, there is a strong family relationship between the Syriac and Armenian churches, and the Coptic and Ethiopian, and between the Syriac and Ethiopian, and between the Byzantine and Roman, and between the Byzantine and Coptic, and between the Roman and Anglican, so really, what it actually boils down to is the persecuted Syriac churches in the Middle East, which continue to be the victim of ethnic cleansing, aren’t radically different from any other Christian churches, but rather lie at the center of the liturgical continuum, especially in the case of the Syriac Orthodox, Syriac Catholic and pre-1960s Maronite Catholic churches (I wish someone would organize a Maronite-Rite Orthodox Church which would revive the old pre-Vatican II Maronite liturgy, which unlike the one they use today, was very close to the Syriac Orthodox liturgy in its ornate beauty, indeed sharing a massive amount of liturgical content with it, for the Maronites were actually a group that separated with the Syriac Orthodox on the basis of some doctrinal dispute the exact nature of which seems lost to history, before settling in Lebanon, which was actually a power move on the part of the Maronites, as it gave them a strategic holdout in the mountains, much like that also taken by the Druze religion, which allowed the Maronites and the Druze to flourish without fear of the frequent genocidal reprisals the Syriac Orthodox and other Middle Eastern Christians continued to endure from the arrival of Islam until the present.

It is also the case that in terms of preserving a broad range of traditional doctrinal positions on everything from the use of iconography (there has never been iconoclasm in the Syriac Orthodox or Maronite Catholic or Syriac Catholic churches), to the incarnational Christology, to the moral theology, the Syriac Orthodox are, or should be, extremely uncontroversial.

Indeed, there is a Syriac Orthodox jurisdiction in India not in communion with the Patriarch of Antioch, the Catholicos of India, or any of the other Oriental Orthodox patriarchates, the Malankara Independent Syrian Church, which is in full communion with the Mar Thoma Syrian Church, a Protestant church that is a member of the Anglican Communion.

Oriental and Syriac Orthodoxy are distinct from Eastern Orthodoxy/Constantinople. EO are more philosophically exacting, in my experience, in terms of their theological categories. The Chalcedonian/miaphysite distinction being a good example.

 

[The Liturgist]

Oriental and Syriac Orthodoxy are distinct from Eastern Orthodoxy/Constantinople. EO are more philosophically exacting, in my experience, in terms of their theological categories. The Chalcedonian/miaphysite distinction being a good example.

Yes, they are distinct, but liturgically they are extremely similiar. For example, the part of the Armenian Orthodox that you would call “The Liturgy of the Word” which in Eastern Orthodox terms might be called the Liturgy of the Catechumens or the Synaxis is basically the same as that in the Byzantine Rite, down to the contents of the three antiphons. The main difference is in the propers and also the anaphora, which is the Anaphora of St. Athanasius, unrelated to an Ethiopian Orthodox anaphora of the same name, both of which I would assume are psuedepigraphical, the Armenian example being an abbreviation of the Divine Liturgy of St. James, which the Eastern Orthodox use on occasion and which is also in theory the most important of the Syriac Orthodox liturgies (in the US, unfortunately, they tend to default to the Anaphora of Mar Dionysius bar Salibi, because it is the shortest. This is not unlike the default to Eucharistic Prayer II in the Novus Ordo Missae of the RCC, or Eucharistic Prayer B when using Rite II of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, both of which are derived from an anaphora included in the Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus.

Now where it gets interesting is that a more complete form of this anaphora is the principle anaphora of the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Church, and it is of substantial length, and if you read that you realize that the Anaphora as recorded by St. Hippolytus is, like the version of the Divine Liturgy of St. Mark in the Euchologion of St. Serapion of Thmuis, or the liturgies in the Apostolic Constitutions, an abbreviated version which contains primarily the prayers that would be said by the bishop or a presbyter in his absence, and lacks the parts said by the choir, which means that Eucharistic Prayer II and its derivatives such as Eucharistic Prayer B are actually shorter than they should be by some margin.

 

[Jamdoc]

Our Lord renamed Simon as Rock. That is the Word of God, do not believe man's traditions over God's Word.

and I guess referring to him as Satan shortly after was just funsies?
Built His church on a man that'd deny even knowing him 3 times publicly when it mattered most?

 

[The Liturgist]

and I guess referring to him as Satan shortly after was just funsies?
Built His church on a man that'd deny even knowing him 3 times publicly when it mattered most?

Well in all fairness to everyone, it was after that messy business had occurred, that towards the end of the Gospel of John Christ specifically asks St. Peter three times to feed His sheep.

Interestingly the Syriac Orthodox Church while being fully Orthodox features a high Petrology, since the Patriarchs of Antioch are successors of St. Peter, and the Popes of Alexandria are in apostolic succession from St. Mark the Evangelist, whose Gospel is traditionally attributed to the recollection of St. Peter while he was in Rome, and these three churches, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 130 AD, became the three autocephalous churches that led the Early Church until the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the construction of Constantinople resulted in those churches also gaining autocephaly (the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and its autocephalous status, together with that of Alexandria, Antioch and Rome is confirmed in Canons 6 and 7 of the Council of Nicaea. However, Rome, Antioch and Alexandria together continue to be called the “Three Petrine Sees” and have a particular importance in Oriental Orthodoxy and even in Eastern Orthodoxy, albeit with Constantinople as New Rome taking the place previously held by Old Rome.

 

[Valletta]

and I guess referring to him as Satan shortly after was just funsies?
Built His church on a man that'd deny even knowing him 3 times publicly when it mattered most?

Yes, the Church is made up of sinners. While Judas hanged himself, Peter rushed to Our Lord for forgiveness. God loves sinners, repent like the thief on the cross. God forgives our sins and left us priests so that we may know our sins are forgiven.

 

[Jamdoc]

Well in all fairness to everyone, it was after that messy business had occurred, that towards the end of the Gospel of John Christ specifically asks St. Peter three times to feed His sheep.

Interestingly the Syriac Orthodox Church while being fully Orthodox features a high Petrology, since the Patriarchs of Antioch are successors of St. Peter, and the Popes of Alexandria are in apostolic succession from St. Mark the Evangelist, whose Gospel is traditionally attributed to the recollection of St. Peter while he was in Rome, and these three churches, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 130 AD, became the three autocephalous churches that led the Early Church until the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the construction of Constantinople resulted in those churches also gaining autocephaly (the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and its autocephalous status, together with that of Alexandria, Antioch and Rome is confirmed in Canons 6 and 7 of the Council of Nicaea. However, Rome, Antioch and Alexandria together continue to be called the “Three Petrine Sees” and have a particular importance in Oriental Orthodoxy and even in Eastern Orthodoxy, albeit with Constantinople as New Rome taking the place previously held by Old Rome.

I'm not debating that Jesus asked Peter to feed the flock, what I'm debating is Jesus building the church on Peter, not Jesus being the Messiah. The Church is built on Jesus, the cornerstone, and Him being the Messiah, the Son of the Living God. not a fallible man.

The primacy of Peter is the thing debated as even Paul, the least of apostles rebuked Peter.