Catholics: How important is studying Church history to being a Christian?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
There is, of course, a vast difference between the communion of saints and the communication to dead people.
And we would agree, that is why we don't pray to those in hell, for those in hell can't hear our prayers because they are truly dead.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The problem that Pope Francis has at times is that he assumes too much from his audience. And this has been a gripe of many Catholics concerning him, because he will say something, and not clarify what he meant. I think he is trying to force people to think a little on their own, but he just doesn't realize that most people don't take the time to get past the words.

For example for the statement above the question to ask is: What does it mean to do good? You have to look at what or should I say Who good is. All goodness leads to God, because God is the author of all that is good; for God is Good. So if we start living a life seeking to do good and to be good, somewhere along the line you will end up in God's grace. See the point of what he is truly saying here?

Francis is a Jesuit, and Jesuits are thinkers and teachers, and the problem that Francis has is that he forgets who he is teaching to at times.

I hear you and respect your thoughts. However do you not see that what you just said places the Pope in conflict with Vatican II????

"As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."
Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers
 
Upvote 0

Fidelibus

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2017
1,185
300
67
U.S.A.
✟66,007.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I see there are no Catholics yet who have taken up your questions.

As a fellow Protestant, my understanding of the Catholic approach is that doctrine is a continuing process of revelation of truth. It did not end in the first century nor with the establishment of the canon of the Bible (which, for Catholics, was finalized at the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century). Rather, God continues to reveal doctrine through the Magesterium of the Catholic Church, of which the Pope, as the Vicar (representative) of Christ is the chief spokesman. Thus it was in 1871 that the Catholic Church established the doctrine of Papal infallibility, that is, the process whereby, under specific conditions, the Pope can make statements which are binding on all Catholics. The most recent use of papal infallibility was in 1950 when the Pope declared the Four Marian doctrines to be dogmas of the Catholic Church.

If you beleive this to be true, maybe you would like to asnwer a couple of questions I asked of Protestants a few pages back that went unanswered.

"So to my Protestant brothers and sisters I would like to ask you a historical church question...... If you beleived as I did as a Protestant, when do you believe the Bible to be codified, and when do you beleive the first writings that would be a part of the New Testament were finally written down? (Chronologized) Thank you for your replies in advance."
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If you beleive this to be true, maybe you would like to asnwer a couple of questions I asked of Protestants a few pages back that went unanswered.

"So to my Protestant brothers and sisters I would like to ask you a historical church question...... If you beleived as I did as a Protestant, when do you believe the Bible to be codified, and when do you beleive the first writings that would be a part of the New Testament were finally written down? (Chronologized) Thank you for your replies in advance."

Your comment is a little deceptive is it not?

I remember your question and I also remember that it was answered. Now I realize the answer was not one you liked or accepted but none the less I am pretty sure it was addressed.

Determining the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis and scholars and later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,813
13,119
72
✟362,419.00
Faith
Non-Denom
What Saint is dead? You don't believe that all the righteous go to heaven to LIVE with God?

Being in China and living in China is one thing. Sitting in my living room in the United States and getting on my knees and folding my hands together and then carrying on a conversation without any telephonic means of communication with someone in China is quite another. We have absolutely no reason to believe that the deceased people in heaven are able to communicate with the non-deceased people on earth.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Major1
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I hear you and respect your thoughts. However do you not see that what you just said places the Pope in conflict with Vatican II????

"As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."
Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers
No it really doesn't. Not everything that the pope says is infallible. That being said what the pope said when understood in the context of what he intended to say isn't a false statement, as I explained.
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Being in China and living in China is one thing. Sitting in my living room in the United States and getting on my knees and folding my hands together and then carrying on a conversation without any telephonic means of communication with someone in China is quite another. We have absolutely no reason to believe that the deceased people in heaven are able to communicate with the non-deceased people on earth.
Yes we do. Its called the Bible. Saul communed with Samuel, Jesus Himself communed with Moses and Elijah, then you throw in all the occurrences in Scripture where men and women communed with angels.

Here is the point, you have two options here. 1) Are the Saints alive and well in heaven? or 2) Are the SDA correct in your view concerning their doctrine of soul-sleep?
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
So you disagree with the creed and New Testament, since they were a product of councils at a time you suggest it had lost connection with apostolic doctrine?

A few of them were. If it were only those people who were cited whenever someone claims that the early church believed such and such (meaning that we are supposed to do so also), there would not be nearly as much controversy over the ECFs as there is.

But, obviously, when a person who lived as far removed from Christ and the Apostles as the 5th century AD (!) is called an "Early Church Father," we are dealing with someone whose views are colored by what the church had become by that time, not what it was in Apostolic times.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
How important is it to study the Church founders and do you think one can be a proper Catholic (by extension, a proper Christian) if they do not nor have desire to study Church founders and the development of doctrines from a Roman Catholic standpoint?

Lemme know!
Vital. If you want to know the correct interpretation of doctrine.

Reformationists for example have many interpretations of eucharist, and most are mutually exclusive.

Only one is consistent with what the apostles handed down to first Christians, so is what Christ taught and that is visible in the writings of the early fathers, such as irenaeus ( he and polycarp disciples of John the apostle) , and Justin martyr - both writing only a few decades after Christ.

They answer Real flesh, real blood. Valid only if performed by bishop or appointee in true succession.

And with that you can discount most denominations.

That is the problem with sola scriptura. Scripture is not sufficient. Tradition and authority carry true meaning for scripture.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No it really doesn't. Not everything that the pope says is infallible. That being said what the pope said when understood in the context of what he intended to say isn't a false statement, as I explained.

So he is infallible until he makes a mistake and then that is OK because he was misunderstood??????

No wonder there are so many Catholic apologetic web sites.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Yes we do. Its called the Bible. Saul communed with Samuel, Jesus Himself communed with Moses and Elijah, then you throw in all the occurrences in Scripture where men and women communed with angels.

Here is the point, you have two options here. 1) Are the Saints alive and well in heaven? or 2) Are the SDA correct in your view concerning their doctrine of soul-sleep?

Biblically speaking, there is no such thing as "soul sleep".

When the Bible describes a person “sleeping” in relation to death as in Luke 8:52; 1 Corinthians 15:6, it does not mean literal sleep. Sleeping is just a way to describe death because a dead body appears to be asleep.

The moment we die, we face the judgment of God as seen in Hebrews 9:27.

For believers, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord as that is told to us in 2 Corinthians 5:6-8; Philippians 1:23).

For unbelievers, death means everlasting punishment in hell Luke 16:22-23.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
And we would agree, that is why we don't pray to those in hell, for those in hell can't hear our prayers because they are truly dead.

Wouldn't you think that the spirits of the saved in heaven are likely preoccupied with other things such as worshipping God and enjoying the glories of heaven????
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,813
13,119
72
✟362,419.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Wouldn't you think that the spirits of the saved in heaven are likely preoccupied with other things such as worshipping God and enjoying the glories of heaven????

Ah, but don't you understand that they become demi-gods after death and are vitally interested in serving as postmen for God to convey prayers to Him since He is too busy to hear them Himself if they were sent to Him directly?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Fidelibus

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2017
1,185
300
67
U.S.A.
✟66,007.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Your comment is a little deceptive is it not?



In what way? I'm just trying to get the historical perspective of those like yourself that adhere to the doctrine of sola scriptura (the bible alone) that the practice of scripture alone was taught and practiced by the early church.
I remember your question and I also remember that it was answered. Now I realize the answer was not one you liked or accepted but none the less I am pretty sure it was addressed.
Again Major1, maybe my failing eye site has failed me once more, but I posted these questions back on Page 2; post # 24, of this thread and don't recall seeing a Protestant or for that matter, a Catholic responce. Maybe you could help me out and repost where I disliked or not accepted the answer. Was it your responce, or someone elses? Thanks.

Determining the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis and scholars and later by early Christians.
When you say " the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis" are you speaking of the Palestinian canon, or the Alexandrian canon? Also Major1, from your Protestant/sola scripturists perspective, who do you beleive these scholars/early Christians to be? Do you beleive them to be sola scripturists such as yourself? History proves they couldn't have been Protestant, so who do you believe them to be? Your Historical evidence and sources to back up your argument would be most appreciated.
Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon.

You are absolutly correct, the Holy Spirit did, through the Holy Catholic Church!
A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing.
Okay.......Which again brings up the question......... From a Protestant/sola scripturists (the bible alone) belief, when do you beleive the bible to have been codified? What do sola scripturists like yourself beleive the chronology of the first writings to be? In other words, what year or years do you think Paul’s first and second letter's to the Thessalonians, the Gospel of Luke, or again, Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians writings would be a part of the New Testament? Again, historical evidence and their sources, would be most appreciated.
It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.
Again, these human followers were who? and when?
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
In what way? I'm just trying to get the historical perspective of those like yourself that adhere to the doctrine of sola scriptura (the bible alone) that the practice of scripture alone was taught and practiced by the early church.?

Simply put, we have the statements of some of the Early Church Fathers to the effect that Scripture is what they referred to when making their pronouncements about the first churches and their beliefs. And the Nicene Creed itself credits Scripture.

Neither of them makes any mention whatsoever of Holy Tradition, the theory that is put up against Scripture Alone by those people who write all the posts here belittling the use of the Bible as our ultimate guide to doctrine.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Major1
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
No. I certainly do not disagree with them..


I didn't think you did disagree... but if you do accept them, it is hard to argue the early fathers who decided such things several centuries from Christ had lost touch with their apostolic roots.

So unless you can find an apostasy, you can only assume they were a continuum of the earliest fathers. Sure, theological understanding developed and the acorn of church structure necessarily grew to an oak. But that's not a argument for suggesting that the councils who decided the creed had drifted from the apostolic roots with the passage of time.

It is also somewhat questioning the power of our Lord, who said his church will be one and the gates of hell would not prevail against it. To believe our Lord allowed the the church to apostasize, is to accuse our Lord of breaking a promise!

Many fundamentalists try to argue that there was an apostasy and they are returning to church roots after millennia. They speculate all sorts of dates : the problem they have is choosing any date that makes doctrinal sense.
Constantine is often painted as the bad guy, but the problem with that is doctrine did not change, as verifiable in contemporary works such as anthony/ anasthasius.
The big problem fundamentalists have is they then do things wholly at odds with even the first fathers, as if apostasy was the first generation!

I think it VERY important to study what the fathers who formed the creed and selected the canon believed scripture meant, since that is part of why they chose it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Wouldn't you think that the spirits of the saved in heaven are likely preoccupied with other things such as worshipping God and enjoying the glories of heaven????

Some of them had no such intention.
St Therese of lisieux said:

"My mission - to make God loved - will begin after my death, I will spend my heaven doing good on earth"
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
You omit to state the definitive act, which is defined as speaking ex cathedra, analogous to Moses seat.
There have been very few such pronouncements.

I hear you and respect your thoughts. However do you not see that what you just said places the Pope in conflict with Vatican II????

"As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."
Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.