The Roman Catholic "State Church" And It's Beginning.

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,033
1,290
✟81,343.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Emperor Constantines "State Church" in Roman Catholocism, found it's beginning in the council of Nicea 325AD

The true church found it's roots in palestine, those that "Opposed" Constatine & Eusebius Arian Heresy, yes they were persecuted by Constatine & Eusebius for taking this biblical stand against Arianism and other beliefs.

You will find that Eusebius the Arian heretic was the tool used by Emperor Constatine to control the Roman Catholic "State Church"

You will closely note Eusebius And Constatine persecuted the Church that opposed their direction, thus the Roman Catholic "State Church's" beginning.

Wikipedia: First Council Of Nicea

The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪˈsiːə/; Greek:Νίκαια [ˈnikεa]) was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city ofNicaea (now İznik, Bursa province, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. Constantine I organized the council along the lines of the Roman Senate and presided over it, but did not cast any official vote.

The First Council of Nicaea was the firstecumenical council of the Church. Most significantly, it resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent local and regional councils of Bishops (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy—the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.

Wikipedia:Eusebius 260-339AD

Eusebius succeeded Agapius as Bishop of Caesarea soon after 313 and was called on byArius who had been excommunicated by his bishop Alexander of Alexandria. An episcopal council in Caesarea pronounced Arius blameless.[33] Eusebius, a learned man and famous author, enjoyed the favour of theEmperor Constantine. Because of this he was called upon to present the creed of his own church to the 318 attendees of the Council of Nicaea in 325."[34] However, the anti-Arian creed from Palestine prevailed becoming the basis for the Nicene Creed.[35]

The theological views of Arius, that taught the subordination of the Son to the Father, continued to be a problem. Eustathius of Antioch strongly opposed the growing influence of Origen's theology as the root ofArianism. Eusebius, an admirer of Origen, was reproached by Eustathius for deviating from the Nicene faith. Eusebius prevailed and Eustathius was deposed at a synod inAntioch.

However, Athanasius of Alexandria became a more powerful opponent and in 334, he was summoned before a synod in Caesarea (which he refused to attend). In the following year, he was again summoned before a synod in Tyre at which Eusebius of Caesarea presided. Athanasius, foreseeing the result, went to Constantinople to bring his cause before the Emperor. Constantine called the bishops to his court, among them Eusebius. Athanasius was condemned and exiled at the end of 335. Eusebius remained in the Emperor's favour throughout this time and more than once was exonerated with the explicit approval of the Emperor Constantine. After the Emperor's death (c.337), Eusebius wrote the Life of Constantine,[36] an important historical work because of eye witness accounts and the use of primary sources. Eusebius died c.339.[37]
 

2Timothy2:15

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2016
2,226
1,227
CA
✟78,248.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Emperor Constantines "State Church" in Roman Catholocism, found it's beginning in the council of Nicea 325AD

The true church found it's roots in palestine, those that "Opposed" Constatine & Eusebius Arian Heresy, yes they were persecuted by Constatine & Eusebius for taking this biblical stand against Arianism and other beliefs.

You will find that Eusebius the Arian heretic was the tool used by Emperor Constatine to control the Roman Catholic "State Church"

You will closely note Eusebius And Constatine persecuted the Church that opposed their direction, thus the Roman Catholic "State Church's" beginning.

Wikipedia: First Council Of Nicea

The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪˈsiːə/; Greek:Νίκαια [ˈnikεa]) was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city ofNicaea (now İznik, Bursa province, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. Constantine I organized the council along the lines of the Roman Senate and presided over it, but did not cast any official vote.

The First Council of Nicaea was the firstecumenical council of the Church. Most significantly, it resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent local and regional councils of Bishops (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy—the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.

Wikipedia:Eusebius 260-339AD

Eusebius succeeded Agapius as Bishop of Caesarea soon after 313 and was called on byArius who had been excommunicated by his bishop Alexander of Alexandria. An episcopal council in Caesarea pronounced Arius blameless.[33] Eusebius, a learned man and famous author, enjoyed the favour of theEmperor Constantine. Because of this he was called upon to present the creed of his own church to the 318 attendees of the Council of Nicaea in 325."[34] However, the anti-Arian creed from Palestine prevailed becoming the basis for the Nicene Creed.[35]

The theological views of Arius, that taught the subordination of the Son to the Father, continued to be a problem. Eustathius of Antioch strongly opposed the growing influence of Origen's theology as the root ofArianism. Eusebius, an admirer of Origen, was reproached by Eustathius for deviating from the Nicene faith. Eusebius prevailed and Eustathius was deposed at a synod inAntioch.

However, Athanasius of Alexandria became a more powerful opponent and in 334, he was summoned before a synod in Caesarea (which he refused to attend). In the following year, he was again summoned before a synod in Tyre at which Eusebius of Caesarea presided. Athanasius, foreseeing the result, went to Constantinople to bring his cause before the Emperor. Constantine called the bishops to his court, among them Eusebius. Athanasius was condemned and exiled at the end of 335. Eusebius remained in the Emperor's favour throughout this time and more than once was exonerated with the explicit approval of the Emperor Constantine. After the Emperor's death (c.337), Eusebius wrote the Life of Constantine,[36] an important historical work because of eye witness accounts and the use of primary sources. Eusebius died c.339.[37]


Simon Magus - Wikipedia

Marcion of Sinope - Wikipedia

Start digging into these guys and see what the Lord shows as to the roots.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Except - the "Catholic Church" wasn't "born" as an entity until 1054, though prior to that her Patriarchs had sometimes headed in their own direction a bit, away from the beliefs held by the other Sees.

It was the Patriarchates that formed the leadership of the Church, not the emperor. And all bishops were equal "brother bishops".

If the history ignores the rest of the Church apart from Rome - which has existed since the birth of the Church at Pentecost, and continues today with unbroken communion with Jerusalem, Antioch, etc. ... then the "history" can't be accurate, but is only a bit of propaganda - usually either pro- or anti-Catholic.

Rome wasn't the be-all and end-all of the Church.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: ml5363
Upvote 0

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,033
1,290
✟81,343.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Except - the "Catholic Church" wasn't "born" as an entity until 1054, though prior to that her Patriarchs had sometimes headed in their own direction a bit, away from the beliefs held by the other Sees.

It was the Patriarchates that formed the leadership of the Church, not the emperor. And all bishops were equal "brother bishops".

If the history ignores the rest of the Church apart from Rome - which has existed since the birth of the Church at Pentecost, and continues today with unbroken communion with Jerusalem, Antioch, etc. ... then the "history" can't be accurate, but is only a bit of propaganda - usually either pro- or anti-Catholic.

Rome wasn't the be-all and end-all of the Church.
We will disagree

"Roman Emperor Constatine" called the first council and "Presided Over It", he set the formation as the Roman Senate1, he used Eusebius for control and persecution of the true Church.

The Roman Catholic church today, finds its roots in this council, and the Roman Emperor and His Fully controlled "State Church"

Were persecuted Eustatius or Athanisus part of this Roman Emperors "State Church"?

No they were persecuted by it, and banished for opposing it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
St. Athanasius is a pillar of the Church, recognized by both Orthodox and Catholics, and responsible for a fair amount of what all of Christendom believes today - including being the first to enumerate the books of the New Testament. I'm not sure on what grounds you are ejecting him from the Church, which was not Constantine's Church, nor of the State.

While Constantine is respected for having legitimized Christianity as a faith and so Christians were no longer legally persecuted by the Roman State, and his authority was used in the calling of a council, he did not make decisions regarding Christianity. The bishops did.

And once again, Rome (as in Catholicism) had no authority over the rest of the Church. She only decided she did later, among various leaders, which ultimately led to a split in the Church when the "Roman Catholic Church" divided herself from the others, insisting she had the authority to rule and to change doctrine, which the rest of the Church opposed.

But there are many false histories out there with various agendas.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: FenderTL5
Upvote 0

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,033
1,290
✟81,343.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
St. Athanasius is a pillar of the Church, recognized by both Orthodox and Catholics, and responsible for a fair amount of what all of Christendom believes today - including being the first to enumerate the books of the New Testament. I'm not sure on what grounds you are ejecting him from the Church, which was not Constantine's Church, nor of the State.

While Constantine is respected for having legitimized Christianity as a faith and so Christians were no longer legally persecuted by the Roman State, and his authority was used in the calling of a council, he did not make decisions regarding Christianity. The bishops did.

And once again, Rome (as in Catholicism) had no authority over the rest of the Church. She only decided she did later, among various leaders, which ultimately led to a split in the Church when the "Roman Catholic Church" divided herself from the others, insisting she had the authority to rule and to change doctrine, which the rest of the Church opposed.

But there are many false histories out there with various agendas.
We will disagree

The true church split away from Constatines Roman State Church, long before the eastern split.

"Roman Emperor Constatine" called the first council and "Presided Over It", he set the formation as the Roman Senate1, he used Eusebius for control and persecution of the true Church.

The Roman Catholic church today, finds its roots in this council, and the Roman Emperor and His Fully controlled "State Church"

Were persecuted Eustatius or Athanisus part of this Roman Emperors "State Church"?

No they were persecuted by it, and banished for opposing it.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
We will disagree

The true church split away from Constatines Roman State Church, long before the eastern split.

"Roman Emperor Constatine" called the first council and "Presided Over It", he set the formation as the Roman Senate1, he used Eusebius for control and persecution of the true Church.

The Roman Catholic church today, finds its roots in this council, and the Roman Emperor and His Fully controlled "State Church"

Were persecuted Eustatius or Athanisus part of this Roman Emperors "State Church"?

No they were persecuted by it, and banished for opposing it.
Looks like we are going in circles then. I've already replied to this post.

The historical documents are there. But I'm not interested in arguing - especially in circles.

I find it ironic that you choose to use St. Athanasius to make this point. He is, as I said, a very important pillar of the Church - THE Church, not Rome alone (who likewise hold him as very important). There was no "Roman State Church".
 
Upvote 0

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,033
1,290
✟81,343.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Looks like we are going in circles then. I've already replied to this post.

The historical documents are there. But I'm not interested in arguing - especially in circles.

I find it ironic that you choose to use St. Athanasius to make this point. He is, as I said, a very important pillar of the Church - THE Church, not Rome alone (who likewise hold him as very important). There was no "Roman State Church".
No circles, you refuse to accept the truth, Constatine created the "Roman Catholic State Church"

He presided over the Council Of Nicea, paid expenses for religious leaders to attend, and mixed his civil authority "Banishing Those That Opposed The Religious Establishment" with the religious authority "State Church"

Below we have Emperor Constatine threatening Athanasius as a murderer, thief, immorality?

Constatine's goal was to get the heretic "Arius" re-established in the Alexandrian church, Athanasius refused and was banished by Constatine And Eusebius "Roman Catholic Church State"

Constatine built a church in Jerusalem, on the site of the church of the holy sepulchure

This Emperor was building churches, and presiding over bishops, handing out civil punishment, sorta like a pope figure.

Wikipedia: The First Synod of Tyre

the Council of Tyre (335 AD) was a gathering of bishops called together by Emperor Constantine I for the primary purpose of evaluating charges brought against Athanasius, the Patriarch of Alexandria.

Background
Athanasius was involved in the early Christian christological and trinitarian debates, and supported the position of the Council of Nicaea in opposition to that of Arius and his followers.

In 328, Athanasius was elected as bishop or patriarch of Alexandria. Alexandria happened to be the city in which Arius was a priest. The situation was further complicated, as Athanasius had not yet reached the age of 30 - the minimum age for bishops in the church.

After Athanasius succeeded to the see of Alexandria, they had accused him of, among other things: immoral conduct, illegally taxing the Egyptian people, supporting rebels to the Imperial throne, and even murdering a bishop and keeping his severed hand for use in magical rites. More to the point, Constantine had decided that he wanted Athanasius to re-admit Arius to the church—which he would not do. In 334 Athanasius was summoned before a synod in Caesarea, which he did not attend.

The Synod
The emperor Constantine had ordered a Synod of bishops to be present at the consecration of the church which he had erected at Jerusalem (the precursor to the Holy Sepulchre). He directed that, as a secondary matter, they should on their way first assemble at Tyre, to examine charges that had been brought against Athanasius.[1]The Emperor also sent a letter to Athanasius, making clear that if he did not attend voluntarily, he would be brought to the Synod forcibly.

Eusebius of Caesarea played a major role in the council and, according to Epiphanius of Salamis, presided over the assembly.[2] About 310 members attended. Athanasius appeared this time with forty-eight Egyptian bishops. The Synod condemned Athanasius, so he went to Constantinople and confronted the Emperor personally.

Aftermath
At a hearing in the presence of the Emperor, Athanasius was cleared of all charges except one: threatening to cut off the grain supply to Constantinople from Egypt. This one charge was enough for the Emperor to exile Athanasius to Trier.

Athanasius did not return from exile until the death of Constantine in 337.
 
Last edited:
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

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Wikipedia, huh?

If this is true, why aren't we all Arians? Why do we instead follow the teachings of St. Athanasius?

You say the Roman Church was based in Jersusalem? Jerusalem is a separate See from Rome.



Part of the history is correct, but it is being misinterpreted.

There was the Church. Five Holy Sees. Rome was one of them. Yes, there were heresies, such as Arianism. The bishops stood against them (sometimes not well supported, such as St. Athanasius against Arianism). But nevertheless, the Church prevailed against heretics.

Eventually Rome herself, through the action of certain popes, tried to take more authority than was granted by Apistolic Tradition, and the result was that Rome schismed from the rest of the Church (unless you ask Rome, who claims the other four Sees schismed from her).

Constantine is most notable for having made Christianity legal and no longer under persecution, and yes, he was involved in calling the council at Nicea.

But any machinations aside, Arius did not prevail AT THAT COUNCIL, Constantine did not establish Arianism over the Church. Constantine was not a bishop and had no voice in setting doctrines.

I'm really not sure what your point is. But there was no "Roman State Church" ... especially not founded in Jerusalem. Jerusalem remains to this day her own independent part of the (now named Orthodox) Church, and to this day is still in communion with the others (except Rome) as well as those that were added later through evangelism.

Forgive me. This is all easily verifiable. And today begins a period of deepening spiritual effort and I ought not be engaging in disputes. There is certainly a lot more misinformation on the internet than anyone can address anyway.

But if what you posted were true, it would make sense that Rome would be espousing Arianism. She never has. And perhaps she should control Jersusalem since the time of Constantine? She doesn't.

Anyway, have a nice day. I'm bowing out. Hopefully folks will do the research from real sources, if it matters to anyone.

Peace to you.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Philip_B
Upvote 0

lyn244

New Member
Jun 2, 2015
3
1
47
✟7,913.00
Faith
Catholic
In reply to Truth7t7

The Catholic Church began before Constantine's rule in Rome.

Here is a quote from Ignatius of Antioch, from his Letter to the Smyrnaeans. 107 AD. He was a disciple of the Apostle John and died a martyr.

"Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Without the bishop’s supervision, no baptisms or love feasts are permitted. On the other hand, whatever he approves pleases God as well. In that way everything you do will be on the safe side and valid." -- St Ignatius of Antioch

And from St Athanasius
“But, beyond these sayings [of Scripture], let us look at the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, the Apostles preached and the Fathers kept.” (To Serapion 1:28; after citing biblical passages concerning the deity of the Holy Spirit)

"I thought that all vain talk of all heretics, many as they may be, had been stopped by the Synod which was held at Nicæa. For the Faith there confessed by the Fathers according to the divine Scriptures is enough by itself at once to overthrow all impiety, and to establish the religious belief in Christ. For this reason at the present time, at the assembling of diverse synods, both in Gaul and Spain, and great Rome , all who came together, as though moved by one spirit, unanimously anathematised those who still were secretly holding with Arius, namely Auxentius of Milan, Ursacius, Valens, and Gaius of Pannonia. And they wrote everywhere, that, whereas the above-said were devising the names of synods to cite on their side, no synod should be cited in the Catholic Church save only that which was held at Nicæa, which was a monument of victory over all heresy, but especially the Arian, which was the main reason of the synod assembling when it did. How then, after all this, are some attempting to raise doubts or questions?… It is enough merely to answer such things as follows: we are content with the fact that this is not the teaching of the Catholic Church, nor did the fathers hold this. But lest the ‘inventors of evil things’ (Romans 1:30) make entire silence on our part a pretext for shamelessness, it will be well to mention a few points from Holy Scripture, in case they may even thus be put to shame, and cease from these foul devices…. Now from the divine Scriptures we discover nothing of the kind. For they say that God came in a human body. But the fathers who also assembled at Nicæa say that, not the body, but the Son Himself is co-essential with the Father, and that while He is of the Essence of the Father, the body, as they admitted according to the Scriptures, is of Mary. Either then deny the Synod of Nicæa, and as heretics bring in your doctrine from the side; or, if you wish to be children of the fathers, do not hold the contrary of what they wrote.” (Letter LIX to Epictetus, 1, 3; NPNF 2, Vol. IV)

Iraneous (130-202 AD)
"True knowledge is [that which consists in] the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither receiving addition nor [suffering] curtailment [in the truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy….” (Against Heresies, 4, 33, 8)
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
When the early Church fathers reference the "Catholic" Church, they are referring to "one holy catholic and apostolic Church" of the Nicene Creed. It doesn't refer to Catholicism particularly (though Rome was an early See and did begin to depart around the middle of the first millennium) - any more than it refers to the "Apostolic" denominations today who teach against the Holy Trinity.

It refers to the Greek "katholikos" which is loosely translated as "according to the wholeness/lacking nothing".
 
Upvote 0

lyn244

New Member
Jun 2, 2015
3
1
47
✟7,913.00
Faith
Catholic
The Nicene Creed was written in 325 AD and then added to in 381. The quotes I gave above are mostly prior to this Creed (ex. 107 AD, Ignatius of Antioch). The early fathers are prior to this Creed.

"Where was [the heretic] Marcion, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago—in the reign of Antonius for the most part—and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherius, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 30 [A.D. 200] - Tertullian).

"But those who say: ‘There was [a time] when he [the Son] was not,’ and ‘before he was born, he was not,’ and ‘because he was made from non-existing matter, he is either of another substance or essence,’ and those who call ‘God the Son of God changeable and mutable,’ these the Catholic Church anathematizes" (Appendix to the Creed of Nicaea [A.D. 325]). "
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Right. It all needs to be understood in context though. None of that means Roman Catholicism as a denomination existed at that time.

The Church began at Pentecost. After the spread of the Gospel, there were 5 ancient sees. Rome was one of them.

Rome began diverging on a few points around the middle of the first millennium. The official schism was in 1054 when Rome became a separate entity. (A bit over simplified.)
 
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

John Bowen

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 16, 2018
417
233
53
dueba
✟48,940.00
Country
Fiji
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Roman empire couldn't stop the spread of Christianity even after killing Jesus his disciples .they couldn't stop his message Many of the Roman games they had Christians were feed to lions or burned at the stake for amusement . Some of the Romans saw that even though the Christians were going through this torture they still had a look of joy on their faces and this caused many Romans to convert right there. So the Romans followed the old saying " If you can beat them join them " and turned the Roman empire into the Roman Catholic Church which was always been a political institution that controlled the world for 1700 years .Destroying the teachings of Jesus and his example bringing us the dark ages ( they burned all books ) the crusades , the inquisition , and in today world child abuse " By they fruits they shall be known " Churches today should really question their doctrines and go back see where they came from and see how it has effected all Christianity especially the concept " sinner by nature " that was from St. Augustine " and how out of alignment it is with Jesus teachings. And Catholics should stand up to the Pope and say the church is off track and demand to get it back on track with all this child abuse.
 
Upvote 0

lyn244

New Member
Jun 2, 2015
3
1
47
✟7,913.00
Faith
Catholic
Right. It all needs to be understood in context though. None of that means Roman Catholicism as a denomination existed at that time.

The Church began at Pentecost. After the spread of the Gospel, there were 5 ancient sees. Rome was one of them.

Rome began diverging on a few points around the middle of the first millennium. The official schism was in 1054 when Rome became a separate entity. (A bit over simplified.)

Agreed, the church began at Pentecost. But there has always been a Head of the Church, the Pope and the succession of this power down the line, it is the Eastern Orthodox Church that split from the Roman Catholic Church in 1054 because of how the Greeks viewed Theology/Law etc.

If you are interested there is a great book by called "Upon this Rock" by Steve Ray. It dives into how an Old Testament Jewish person would have interpreted the "the keys to the kingdom" in its proper context. Which I think the issue comes down to the Pope.

Also another good book is "Seven Lies about Catholic History" by Diane Moczar.

Yes, Catholics should stand up to the Pope, but it all must be done with respect and humility. Just as there is order in God's Heavenly Kingdom, there must be order in His kingdom on Earth.

The good thing here is that we are all in the pursuit of Truth.

God Bless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Agreed, the church began at Pentecost. But there has always been a Head of the Church, the Pope and the succession of this power down the line, it is the Eastern Orthodox Church that split from the Roman Catholic Church in 1054 because of how the Greeks viewed Theology/Law etc.

If you are interested there is a great book by called "Upon this Rock" by Steve Ray. It dives into how an Old Testament Jewish person would have interpreted the "the keys to the kingdom" in its proper context. Which I think the issue comes down to the Pope.

Also another good book is "Seven Lies about Catholic History" by Diane Moczar.

Yes, Catholics should stand up to the Pope, but it all must be done with respect and humility. Just as there is order in God's Heavenly Kingdom, there must be order in His kingdom on Earth.

The good thing here is that we are all in the pursuit of Truth.

God Bless.
Obviously if you are Catholic we will have disagreements on this.

I don't mind discussing it, but it doesn't seem central to this thread and we've both stated our position so I'm willing to leave it at that.

God be with you. :)
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,434
11,981
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,724.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Agreed, the church began at Pentecost. But there has always been a Head of the Church, the Pope and the succession of this power down the line
That isn't what was stated by St Ignatius in the quote you posted earlier:

Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Without the bishop’s supervision, no baptisms or love feasts are permitted. On the other hand, whatever he approves pleases God as well. In that way everything you do will be on the safe side and valid." -- St Ignatius of Antioch​

This is what "Catholic" means. The bishop, surrounded by his faithful is the whole Church, complete and lacking nothing, just as each person of the Holy Trinity is fully God, not 'part' of God. Ignatius recognises no bishop of bishops for the Church to be catholic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ~Anastasia~
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