Are catholics different from "Christians"?

[good4u]

This is why this thread is important...Protestants and Catholics will NEVER agree. Eclessical unity will never happen. NEVER.

 

[Achichem]

As an ex-catholic I have both a unique view and a unique bias.

However my opinion on the matter is simple, NO. But that does not mean that some Catholics are, it just I believe there are fundamental problems with the religious doctrine.
However this is my opinion, and I know I will offend people but it truly not my intent.

Here are my clear complaints.

-The popes name ?Holy Father? I find blasphemes to God. And a clear violation of the third commandment (which I believe you should naturally follow as a Christian)
-I believe its wrong that no matter where you go in a Catholic Church,chapel, basilica or cathedral. That you pray to or bow to a graven image, even bowing at the time of the you-cur-ist (I don?t know how to spell it) you bow to a statue on the cross. I understand how Catholics justify this, but thats just not good enough in my opinion.

-I believe that praying through saints is wrong; I believe this put them before our father.

-I believe the emphasis put of Mary went too far, I agree the holy mother desires honor but there needs to be limits.

-I find replacing the law of God with church law is wrong

-And I think its history speaks for it self.

-there is more but it is minor stuff.

On the other matter being discussed, I?m sure you all know my opinion so all I will say is, when one Church hoards literacy, persecute other opinions with death, and controls most of the Christian world. It?s a little hard to write down history that sticks around.

In 1586-87, I think God made it quite clear who he thinks was what he wanted. Of course once again that is just my opinion.

 

[nyj]

However my opinion on the matter is simple, NO.

No? So you don't think Catholics are Christians?

But that does not mean that some Catholics are, it just I believe there are fundamental problems with the religious doctrine.

Hmmm, so you think some Catholics are Christians despite they being Catholic?

However this is my opinion, and I know I will offend people but it truly not my intent.

Not offended, just disappointed.

-The popes name ?Holy Father? I find blasphemes to God. And a clear violation of the third commandment (which I believe you should naturally follow as a Christian)

1 Corinthians 4:15
For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

Hmmm... interesting. Scriptural proof to refute your position. Or do you disagree with St. Paul too when he told Corinth he was their father?

-I believe its wrong that no matter where you go in a Catholic Church,chapel, basilica or cathedral. That you pray to or bow to a graven image, even bowing at the time of the you-cur-ist (I don?t know how to spell it) you bow to a statue on the cross. I understand how Catholics justify this, but thats just not good enough in my opinion.

You claim to have been a Catholic but can't spell "Eucharist"? First off, we don't pray to graven images, never have and we never will. We pray to the Saint depicted by the icon or statue, but never to the statue or icon itself. Prayer to the Saints in Heaven is entirely Biblical and has a sound Scriptural Basis.

-I believe that praying through saints is wrong; I believe this put them before our father.

So because you believe it's wrong, that makes Catholics not Christian? Lucky for you God doesn't rely on people's opinions to love His children.

As for praying to the saints, see my link above.

-I believe the emphasis put of Mary went too far, I agree the holy mother desires honor but there needs to be limits.

The Mother of our Lord doesn't desire our honor, but she is deserving of it.

-I find replacing the law of God with church law is wrong

Umm, how can one refute something which isn't true?

-And I think its history speaks for it self.

You mean its preserving the Bible for a millenium and a half before it could be mass produced?

Or perhaps you mean its defeating of the multitude of heresies (such as Gnosticism) that have plagued the faith?

Or perhaps you mean its defining of the Trinity and the Hypostatic Union which are theological understandings of Christianity today?

Maybe you're referring to the Nicene Creed which Christian Forums itself uses as a rule of faith for Christians here?

In 1586-87, I think God made it quite clear who he thinks was what he wanted. Of course once again that is just my opinion.

So it's your opinion and not supported by Scripture? Fair enough, but everyone has an opinion, so that's not saying much.

 

[Palatka44]

You of course have historical evidence that such a Protestant sect existed. And of course the One Holy Apostolic Church (pre-Schism) also persecuted this sect. I would be interested in reading their writings so I may learn of this 'Church' that existed for 2000 years outside of Apostolic Christianity.

It is true that the Church existed before the Catholics came on the scene.
While the Roman Church existed from the earliest times of the church's beginnings. As we have the Apostle Paul writing letters to it and it was the church at Rome that ministered to him while imprisoned there.
Over the next 300 years this church was under constant persecution and the willingness to make peace with the Roman Government was at its best when Constantine came to power. He made Christianity the state religion and to appease the pagans the icons of the Christian faith replaced pagan gods and goddesses and pagan holidays became Christian holidays, i.e. Dec 25th. He set up a priestly hierarchy over the masses or laity of which Christ surely hates because we have only one advocate between God and man the man Christ Jesus. To set up any other to hear our sins is to say that He is not adequate to hear every confession.
The Church that had to hide in the catacombs now had the full power of the Roman Government behind it. Constantine knew that in order to consolidate his rule he had to bring all the other churches under his roof. Those that would not join this universal church suffered greatly and were put to death for not allowing this early form of ecumenism. Soon those that would not join were few and far but there has always been a group to survive.
There would not be a group that could ever match the power of the Roman Catholic Church until the true believers within her began to come out of her.
Such are the beginnings of the Catholic Church.
Search history Oblio you know it to be true.

 

[nyj]

Such are the beginnings of the Catholic Church.
Search history Oblio you know it to be true.

Where people come up with such stuff is beyond me.

 

[Philip]

Some church history for Malaka:

The Waldenses were not early Baptists at the beginning of their movement. They began as an off-shoot of the Catholic Church. Consider the following confession written by their founder, Waldo, in AD 1180:

"In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and of the Blessed and Ever-Virgin Mary. Be it noted by all the faithful that I, Valdesius [Waldo], and all my brethren, standing before the Holy Gospels, do declare that we believe with all our hearts, having been grasped by faith, that we profess openly that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three Persons, one God....

"We firmly believe and explicitly declare that the incarnation of the Divinity did not take place in the Father and the Holy Spirit, but solely in the Son, so that he who was the divine Son of God the Father was also true man from his Mother.

"We believe one Church, Catholic, Holy, Apostolic and Immaculate, apart from which no one can be saved, and in the sacraments therein administered through the invisible and incomprehensible power of the Holy Spirit, sacraments which may be rightly administered by a sinful priest.... [note that this statement refers precisely to the Catholic Church, and not some abstract universal church.]

"We firmly believe in the judgment to come and in the fact that each man will receive reward or punishment according to what he has done in this flesh. We do not doubt the fact that alms, sacrifice, and other charitable acts are able to be of assistance to those who die.

"And since, according to the Apostle James, faith without works is dead, we have renounced this world and have distributed to the poor all that we possess, according to the will of God, and we have decided that we ourselves should be poor in such a way as not to be careful for the morrow, and to accept from no one gold, silver, or anything else, with the exception of raiment and daily food. We have set before ourselves the objective of fulfilling the Gospel counsels as precepts.

"We believe that anyone in this age who keeps to a proper life, giving alms and doing other good works from his own possessions and observing the precepts from the Lord, can be saved. "We make this declaration in order that if anyone should come to you affirming that he is one of us, you may know for certain that he is not one of us if he does not profess this same faith." (Georgio Tourn, The Waldensians : The First 800 Years tr. C.P. Merlino (Torino, Italy: Claudiana Editrice, 1980), pp 13-14)​

The Waldenses, in a statement to the bishop of Albano, confessed their belief in transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, and infant baptism.( Rosalind B. Brooke., The Coming of the Friars (NY: Barnes and Noble, 1975) pp 72-73). Here is a quotation from the Waldensian poem Noble Lesson

"To make our confession sincerely, without any defect: and to do penance during the present life: to fast, to give alms, and to pray with a fervent heart; indeed, through these things the soul finds salvation." (Pius Melia, The Origin, Persecutions, and Doctrines of the Waldenses (NY: AMS Press, 1978 reprint of 1870 edition) p. 98.)​

Although as late as 1508 the Waldenses Confession of Faith still contained all 7 of the Catholic sacraments including infant baptism, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and priestly absolution from sin. (Emilio Comba, History of the Waldenses of Italy, tr. Teofilo Comba (NY: AMS Press, 1978 reprint of 1889 edition) p. 96. [Note that Comba was himself one of the Waldenses]).

 

[Philip]

It is true that the Church existed before the Catholics came on the scene.

Why not give some evidence of it from AD 100 to AD 500? Can you name one person from that time period who was a non-Catholic Christian? Can you cite one document detailing their beliefs?

Over the next 300 years this church was under constant persecution and the willingness to make peace with the Roman Government was at its best when Constantine came to power. He made Christianity the state religion and to appease the pagans the icons of the Christian faith replaced pagan gods and goddesses and pagan holidays became Christian holidays,

You really don't know history, do you? Constantine moved the capitol from Rome to Constantinople to remove the government from the influence of the pagan nobles in Rome.

He set up a priestly hierarchy over the masses or laity of which Christ surely hates because we have only one advocate between God and man the man Christ Jesus.

Two errors: First, the hierarchy is not between God and man. Second, the hierarchy existed long before Constantine. Let me know if you need the citations.

Constantine knew that in order to consolidate his rule he had to bring all the other churches under his roof. Those that would not join this universal church suffered greatly and were put to death for not allowing this early form of ecumenism.

Cite? (Apologies to Oblio)

Soon those that would not join were few and far but there has always been a group to survive.

Cite?

 

[Philip]

Some more on church history for Malaka:

Much of what we know of the Paulicans comes from The Key of Truth, a book written by Paulicans in Armenia, probably in the 8th to 10th centuries. It is clear, by their own testimony, that the Paulicans denied the Trinity.

The Paulicans did not believe that Jesus was the Eternal Son of the Father. Rather, the believed He was a created man who"is faithful to his creator, as was Moses in all his house" (The Key of Truth, 94). By living a sinless life, Jesus was elevated by God who "admitted him into the mystery of the holy Godship" (The Key of Truth, 80). In contradiction to the Scriptures, the Paulicans taught that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God at His baptism:

"It was in the season of his [Jesus'] maturity that he received baptism; then it was that he received authority, received the high-priesthood, received the kingdom and the office of chief shepherd. Moreover, he was then chosen; then he won lordship... Then he became Savior of us sinners; then he was filled with the Godhead." (The Key of Truth, 75)​

Furthermore, the Paulicans refused to baptize people until they we 30 years old and believed that sins committed after baptism could not be forgiven. ("Paulicans" Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed.)

Unlike many other "remnant" groups, the Paulicans had a sizable military force and were allied with the Arab Muslim armies. This is recorded in Henry Gibbons classic The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire:

"..the neighbouring hills were covered with the Paulician fugitives, who now reconciled the use of the Bible and the sword. During more than thirty years, Asia was afflicted by the calamities of foreign and domestic war; in their hostile inroads, the disciples of St. Paul [the Paulicans] were joined with those of Mahomet [Mohammed]; and the peaceful Christians [the Byzantine Christians], the aged parent and tender virgin, who were delivered into barbarous servitude, might justly accuse the intolerant spirit of their sovereign. So urgent was the mischief, so intolerable the shame, that even the dissolute Michael, the son of Theodora, was compelled to march in person against the Paulicians: he was defeated under the walls of Samosata; and the Roman emperor fled before the heretics whom his mother had condemned to the flames. The Saracens fought under the same banners, but the victory was ascribed to Carbeas; and the captive generals, with more than a hundred tribunes, were either released by his avarice, or tortured by his fanaticism. The valour and ambition of Chrysocheir, his successor, embraced a wider circle of rapine and revenge. In alliance with his faithful Moslems, he boldly penetrated into the heart of Asia; the troops of the frontier and the palace were repeatedly overthrown; and pillage Asia Minor. the edicts of persecution were answered by the pillage of Nice and Nicomedia, of Ancyra and Ephesus; nor could the apostle St. John protect from violation his city and sepulcher" (The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire, chap liv)​

Many prominent Baptist theologians now denounce this attempt to trace Baptist doctrines through the Paulicans. Foremost of these is Henry McGoldrick:

"When, by means of the Key[of Truth], the Paulicans are permitted to speak for themselves, it becomes crystal clear that they were not Baptists. In fact, when judged by a traditional creed or standard of orthodoxy, they cannot be regarded as Christians at all" (Baptist Successionism, 34)[emphasis mine]​

 

[Oblio]

Cite? (Apologies to Oblio)

I believe this is the first time I have heard the synthesis of the Constantinian Apostacy (tm) with The Catholics killed them all so we don't have any records cause the True Christians (tm) were either dead or in hiding ...

 

[Philip]

Even more church history:


The Cathari (Albigense in France) were dualistic and Gnostic. They believed in a good deity and an evil deity. The evil deity is the one who produced the material world, and therefore all physical things were evil. This evil deity was the god of the Old Testament, and not the same God that revealed Himself in the New Testament.

By their own confession:

"affirming that the creation of all visible and material things was not the work of God the Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, but of the devil and Satan, the evil deity, whom you [Peter Auterius, and Albigense] call the God of this world, the Creator and Prince of this world" ( Gui, Bernard, "Sentence on Peter Auterius", Book of Sentences, A.D. 1693)​

and again:

"two creators: viz., one of invisible things, whom they call the benevolent god, and another of visible things, whom they named the malevolent god. The New Testament they attributed to the benevolent god, but the Old Testament to the malevolent god, and rejected it altogether, except certain authorities which are inserted in the New Testament from the Old, which, out of reverence to the New Testament, they esteemed worthy of reception. . . They also call him [the Old Testament god] a homicide because he burned up Sodom and Gomorrah and destroyed the world by the waters of the deluge . . . They also affirmed that all the fathers of the Old Testament were ******, that John the Baptist was one of the greater demons." (Pierre dex Vaux de Cernay, "Historia Albigensis,", in Peters, Heresy and Authority, 123; cf. "Letter of Henry, Abbot of Clairvaux, A.D. 1178)​

Because they believed all matter was created by an evil god, all matter must also be evil. Therefore, they denied Christ's Incarnation and subsequent death and Resurrection since having a holy God could not have an evil physical body (Kenneth Scott Latourette [Baptist]: A History of Christianity: vol. 1: Beginnings to 1500 (NY: Harper & Row, 1953, pp. 454-455)). Jesus was an angel, not God. His humnan body was merely an illusion. His suffering and death on the cross was an illusion (Jaroslav Pelikan [Lutheran], The Growth of Medieval Theology (600-1300) (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1978, pp. 238-241)). All marriage and sexual intercourse was evil because it could potentially generate another body which "trapped" the soul until it could be "liberated" by death; even those foods associated with sexual reproduction were forbidden, like meat, milk, eggs, and other animal produce (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church [Anglican] (ed. F.L. Cross, 2nd ed., ed. F.L. Cross & E.A. Livingstone, Oxford Univ. Press, 1983, "Albigenses," p. 31)). They denied the existence of hell, believing instead that every Albigense soul was saved, if only by a continuous reincarnation into a new body until purified (The Age of Faith, Will Durant [secularist] (NY: Simon and Schuster, 1950, pp. 771-772)). Further, the Albigense believed in a hierarchy that held control over salvation.

As to the perfect heretics however they had a magistracy whom they called Deacons and Bishops, without the imposition of whose hands, at the time of his death, none of the believers thought that he could be saved; but if they laid their hands upon any dying man, however wicked, if he could only say a Pater noster [Lord's Prayer], they considered him to be saved, that without any satisfaction, and without any other aid, he immediately took wing to heaven. (Raynaldus, "Annales," in S. R. Maitland, trans., History of the Albigenses and Waldenses, (London: C. J. G. and F. Rivington, 1832), pp. 392-394)​

They denied not only infant baptism but all water baptism, since water is part of the physical world and therefore evil. They replaced baptism with another ritual:

If the believer has fasted and if the Christians [the perfect] have agreed to admit him to the Prayer, let them wash their hands, and such believers as are there shall do likewise. And then the leading Good Man [a perfecti], the one who ranks after the elder, shall make three bows to the elder and then prepare a table. Let him bow again three times: then let him spread a cloth on the table and again bow thrice. Then he shall put the Book [the Gospels] on the table and say: 'Bless us, have mercy on us'. Then, let the believer perform his melioramentum [an act of bowing 3 times before one of the "perfect" and receiving a benediction] and take the Book from the hand of the elder. And the elder should admonish him and preach to him from suitable texts. "from all this you must understand that in presenting yourself before the sons of Jesus Christ, you are confirming the faith and the teaching of the Church of God, as the Holy Scriptures give us to understand. For the people of God deserted the Lord God long ago. They departed from the wisdom and the will of their Divine Father, deceived by evil spirits and submitting themselves to them. And for these and many other reasons you must understand that Our Father wishes to have pity on his people and to receive them into His peace and harmony through the coming of His Son, Jesus Christ. Therefore, you are here in the presence of the disciples of Jesus Christ, in this place, where, as was shown before, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost dwell in spirit, so that you may receive the holy prayer that the Lord Jesus Christ gave to his disciples and so that your petitions and your prayers may be heard by Our Father. You must understand that if you wish to receive this holy prayer you must repent for all your sins and forgive all man. . . Moreover, if God gives you grace to receive this holy prayer, you should vow in your heart that you will keep it all the days of your life, according to the custom of the Church of God, in truth and chastity [any act of intercourse, even between husband and wife, was considered adultery] and in all other good virtues which God may vouchsafe you. We therefore pray the Good Lord, who made the disciples of Jesus Christ worthy to receive and hold to this holy prayer, that He will give to you also the grace of receiving and holding to it, for His honor and for your salvation'. "Have mercy on us."

And then the elder shall say the prayer and the believer shall repeat it after him.. Then let the elder say: "We give you this holy prayer, so that you receive it from God, and from us, and from the Church, and so that you may repeat it at any moment of your life, day and night, alone or in company, and so that you must never eat or drink without first saying this prayer. And if you should fail to do so, you must do penance for your fault." And the believer must answer: "I receive it from God, from you, and from the Church." Then he should perform his melioramentum and give thanks. Then let the Christians say a dobla [ repetitions of the Lord's Prayer] with genuflexions and requests for grace and forgiveness, and the believer shall do the same. (Wakefield, Walter L. and Evans, Austin P. Heresies of the High Middle Ages (New York, 1969))​

 

[Philip]

I believe this is the first time I have heard the synthesis of the Constantinian Apostacy (tm) with The Catholics killed them all so we don't have any records cause the True Christians (tm) were either dead or in hiding ...

I think I saw the combination posted by WitL on TBTSNBN. Mentioning the Paulicans is always fun. It gives us the We don't have any records because the Catholics killed all the True Christians and burned their books. Oh, someone found some records like the Key of Truth. Um, I guess those must have been forged.

 

[geocajun]

As a Bapist, I should inform you that Baptists are not reformationists, nor protestors of the Catholic church, but have existed since the first century.

I see you have failed to substantiate this statement.
It does appear that your arguement has a "all outside the EO/Catholic faith were baptist" flavor to it.

 

[nyj]

I see you have failed to substantiate this statement.
It does appear that your arguement has a "all outside the EO/Catholic faith were baptist" flavor to it.

He's probably referring to the following:
The Trail of Blood

It's pretty much summarized in the Chart that accompanies this work.

Of course, he'll probably plead ignorance to knowing a man named John Smythe and the significance of the year 1605.

 

[Palatka44]

Philip,
Who is Malaka?

 

[Serapha]

Some church history for Malaka:

The Waldenses were not early Baptists at the beginning of their movement. They began as an off-shoot of the Catholic Church. Consider the following confession written by their founder, Waldo, in AD 1180:

and a contradiction to your posting....

Among all the sects, there is no one more pernicious to the church than that of the Leonists (Waldenses), and for three reasons: In the first place, because it is the most ancient: for some say that it dates back to the time of Sylvester (A. D. 825); others to the time of the apostles. In the second place. because it is the most widespread. There is hardly a country where it does not exist. In the third place, because if other sects strike with horror those who listen to them, the Leonists, on the contrary, posses a great outward appearance of piety. As a matter of fact they lead irreproachable lives before men and as regards their faith and the articles of their creed, they are orthodox. Their one fault is, that they blaspheme against the Church and the clergy,—points to which laymen In general are known to be too easily led away (Gretscher, Contra Valdenses, IV.).

"We believe one Church, Catholic, Holy, Apostolic and Immaculate, apart from which no one can be saved, and in the sacraments therein administered through the invisible and incomprehensible power of the Holy Spirit, sacraments which may be rightly administered by a sinful priest.... [note that this statement refers precisely to the Catholic Church, and not some abstract universal church.]

and a contradiction to your posting....

A Catechism emanating from the Waldenses of the thirteenth century makes no allusion to infant baptism. It says that the church catholic, that is, the elect of God through the merits of Christ, is gathered together by the Holy Spirit, and foreordained to eternal life (Gilly, Waldensian Researches, I. lxxii. London, 1825), which is not consistent with infant baptism.

The Waldenses, in a statement to the bishop of Albano, confessed their belief in transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, and infant baptism.( Rosalind B. Brooke., The Coming of the Friars (NY: Barnes and Noble, 1975) pp 72-73).

The preceding statement contradicts what you post here. The Waldenses did NOT support infant baptism and I have found nothing that indicates the belief in transubstantiation or prayers for the dead.


In contrast to your statement:

Enervinus of Cologne writes to St. Bernard a letter in which he says of the Waldenses:

They do not believe in infant baptism: alleging that place in the Gospel, Whosoever shall believe and be baptized shall be saved (Mabillon, Vetera Analecta, 111. 473).

Petrus Cluniacensis, A. D., 1146, wrote against them, and brought this charge:

That infants are not to be baptized, or saved by the faith of another, but ought to be baptized and saved by thou own faith . . . And that those who are baptized In infancy, when grown up, should be baptized again. . rather rightly baptized (Hist. EccI. Madgeburg, cent. XII C. v.834).



It is possible that some of the Italian Waldenses (so-called) practiced infant baptism (Döllinger, Sektengerchichte, II 52); There is no account that the French Waldenses, or the Waldenses proper, ever practiced infant baptism. As early as the year 1184 there was a union of the Poor men of Lyons, as some of the followers of Waldo were called, and the Arnoldists, who rejected infant baptism. (A History of the Baptists, Christian)

Ermengard, A. D. 1192, says:

They pretend that this sacrament cannot be conferred except upon those who demand it with their own lips, hence they infer the other error. that baptism does not profit infants who receive it (Migne, CCIV. 1255).




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

).

That certainly flies in the face of my previous posting.... hmmmmmmmmmmm

Phillip, here's a church history lesson for you....



It was the received opinion among the Waldenses that they were of ancient origin and truly apostolic. "They call themselves," says David of Augsburg, "successors of the apostles, and say that they are in possession of the apostolic authority, and of the keys to bind and unbind" (Preger, Der Tractat des David von Augsburg uber die Waldensier. Munchen, 1876).

A statement of the Waldenses themselves is at hand. In a Waldensian document, which some have dated as early as the year 1100, in a manuscript copy which dates from 1404, may he found their opinion on the subject of their antiquity. The Noble Lessons, as it is called, says:

We do not find anywhere in the writings of the Old Testament that the light of truth and holiness was at any time completely extinguished. There have always been men who walked faithfully in the paths of righteousness. Their number has been at times reduced to few; but has never been altogether lost. We believe that the same has been the case from the time of Jesus Christ until now; and that it will be so until the end. For if the cause of God was founded, it was in order that it might remain until the end of time. She preserved for a long time the virtue of holy religion, and, according to ancient history, her directors lived in poverty and humility for about three centuries; that is to say, down to the time of Constantine. Under the reign of this Emperor, who was a leper, there was a man in the church named Sylvester, a Roman. Constantine went to him, was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and cured of his leprosy. The Emperor finding himself healed of a loathsome disease, In the name of Christ, thought he would honor him who had wrought the cure by bestowing upon him the crown of the Empire. Sylvester accepted it, but his companion, it is said, refused to consent, separated from him, and continued to follow the path of poverty. Then, Constantine, went away to regions beyond the sea, followed by a multitude of Romans, and built up the city to which he gave his name—Constantinople so that from that time the Heresiarch rose to honor and dignity, and evil was multiplied upon the earth. We do not believe that the church of God, absolutely departed from the truth; but one portion yielded, and, as is commonly seen, the majority was led away to evil; and the other portion remained long faithful to the truth it had received. Thus, little by little, the sanctity of the church declined. Eight centuries after Constantine, there arose a man by the name of Peter, a native, they say. of a country called Vaud (Schmidt, Aktenstrucke, ap. Hist. Zeitschrift, 1852 a. 239. MSS. Cambridge University, vol. A, f. 236-238 and Noble Leizon, V. 403. For the genuineness of the Noble Lessons see Brez, Histoire des Vaudois, 1.42. Paris, 1793).

The great church historian, Neander, in commenting on this document, suggests that it may have been "of an elder origin than 1120. He further says:

But it is not without some foundation of truth that the Waldenses of this period asserted the high antiquity of their sect, and maintained that from the time of the secularization of the church—that is, as they believed, from the time of Constantine’s gift to the Roman bishop Sylvester—such an opposition finally broke forth in them, had been existing all along. See Pilicdorf contra Waldenses, c. i. Bibl. patr. Ludg. T. XXV. f. 278. (Neander, History of the Christian Church, VIII. 352).

Such was the tradition and such was the opinion of the Waldenses in regard to their origin. They held to a "secret perpetuity during the Middle Ages, vying with the Catholic perpetuity" (Michelet, Histoire de France, II. 402. Paris, 1833).

Theodore Beza, the Reformer of the sixteenth century, voices the sentiment of his times, when he says:

As for the Waldenses, I may be permitted to call them the very seed of the primitive and purer Christian church, since, they are those that have been upheld, as is abundantly manifest, by the wonderful providence of God, so that neither those endless storms and tempests by which the whole Christian world has been shaken for so many succeeding ages, and the Western part so miserably oppressed by the Bishop of Rome, falsely so called; nor those horrible persecutions which have been expressly raised against them, were able so far to prevail as to make them bend, or yield a voluntary subjection to the Roman tyranny and idolatry (Moreland, History of the Evangelical Churches, 7).

Jonathan Edwards, the great President of Princeton University, in his "History of Redemption," says of the Waldenses:

In every age of this dark time, there appeared particular persons in all parts of Christendom, who bore a testimony against the corruptions and tyranny of the church of Rome. There is no one age of antichrist, even in the darkest time of all, but eccleastica1 historians mention a great many by name, who manifested an abhorrence of the Pope and his idolatrous worship. God was pleased to maintain an uninterrupted succession of witnesses through the whole time, in Germany, France, Britain, and other countries, as historians demonstrate, and mention them by name, and give an account of the testimony which they held. Many of them were private persons, and many of them ministers, and some magistrates and persons of great distinction. And there were numbers in every age, who were persecuted and put to death for this testimony.

Then speaking especially of the Waldenses, he says:

Some of the Popish writers themselves own that that people never submitted to the church of Rome. One of the Popish writers, speaking of the Waldenses, says, the heresy of the Waldenses is the oldest heresy In the world. It is supposed, that this people first betook themselves to this desert, secret place among the mountains to hide themselves from the severity of the heathen persecutions, which were before Constantine the Great.

The special historians of the Waldenses claim the most remote origin for them. For example, Mr. Faber says:

The evidence which I have now adduced distinctly proves, not only that the Waldenses and Albigenses existed anterior to Peter. of Lyon,; but likewise, that at the time of his appearance in the latter part of the twelfth century, they were already considered two communities of very high antiquity. Hence it follows, that, even in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the Valensic churches were so ancient, that the remote commencement was placed, by their inquisitive enemies themselves, far beyond the memory of man. The best informed Romanists of that period pretended not to affix any certain date to their organization, They were unable to pitch upon any specific time, when these venerable churches existed not. All that they certainly knew was that they had flourished long since, that they were far more ancient than any modern sect, that they had visibly existed from a time, beyond the utmost memory of man (Faber, The Vallenses and Albigenses).

Sir Samuel Moreland remarks that any lapse between Claudius of Turin and Waldo "would hinder the continual succession of the churches no more than the sun or moon cease to be when their light is eclipsed by the interposition of other bodies, or more than the Rhone or the Garonne lose their continual current because for some time they were underground and appeared not" (Acland, The Glorious Recovery of the Vaudois, xxxvi).


A History of the Baptists, John T. Christian


~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

I see you have failed to substantiate this statement.
It does appear that your arguement has a "all outside the EO/Catholic faith were baptist" flavor to it.

~keep reading~


~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

I believe this is the first time I have heard the synthesis of the Constantinian Apostacy (tm) with The Catholics killed them all so we don't have any records cause the True Christians (tm) were either dead or in hiding ...

But there is a "non-biblical" phrase that is appropriate here.


"If the shoe fits....


~malaka~

 

[Oblio]

There are Biblical phrases that do apply, and not to the Waldensians, Paulicans, Albiginsians or any other heretical sects ...

Matthew 16:18 RSVA And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

and

Matthew 5:14-16 RSVA "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid. (15) Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. (16) Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.

 

[Serapha]

No? So you don't think Catholics are Christians?
Hmmm, so you think some Catholics are Christians despite they being Catholic?

....


You claim to have been a Catholic but can't spell "Eucharist"?


...

So because you believe it's wrong, that makes Catholics not Christian? Lucky for you God doesn't rely on people's opinions to love His children.



...

You mean its preserving the Bible for a millenium and a half before it could be mass produced?

Or perhaps you mean its defeating of the multitude of heresies (such as Gnosticism) that have plagued the faith?

Or perhaps you mean its defining of the Trinity and the Hypostatic Union which are theological understandings of Christianity today?

Maybe you're referring to the Nicene Creed which Christian Forums itself uses as a rule of faith for Christians here?

So it's your opinion and not supported by Scripture? Fair enough, but everyone has an opinion, so that's not saying much.

bear in mind,


Everyone has an opinion... and you presented yours.... and "that's not saying much".... You could have presented in in a "nice" manner... but you chose scarcasm as your means of delivery.

DaTsar was sincere in his reply to this posting... and he addressed the issue that was posted.... you have yet to reply to the initial question at all... you are too busy slamming members and their responses to address the question that was posted.

Killing the messenger has never killed the message.


~malaka~

 

[geocajun]

~keep reading~

ooooh a mystery!