• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

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

Discussion in 'Denomination Specific Theology' started by friend of, Jul 27, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Major1

    Major1 Well-Known Member

    +2,297
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Agreed in that you will learn about the Catholic faith, but it will not do one single thing in the process of salvation. Salvation is not based on church history but the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ plus NOTHING!
     
  2. concretecamper

    concretecamper Member of His Church

    +1,248
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Republican
    It may prevent you from falling into error and thus save you. But knowing Church history does not directly save you.
     
  3. Major1

    Major1 Well-Known Member

    +2,297
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    I can agree with that.
     
  4. Fidelibus

    Fidelibus Well-Known Member

    509
    +148
    Catholic
    Private
    As a Catholic, I beleive it is very important to study Church history so to fully understand Christianity. As Protestant before my conversion to The Catholic Church, not so much. My conversion to the Catholicism unwittingly began when I started doing historical research on Christianity, mainly Protestantism. What I come to find, was that nearly every Protestant/non-denomanational sect adhered to the teachings of Sola Scriptura, (bible alone) but they had different takes on what scripture was teaching. The question that left me pondering on was.... whom among them were right, and who was in error?
    Finding out of this confusion only sparked my interest in early church history even more, so I started looking back into the history of Martin Luther and the Refornation. In my research into pre-reformation Christianity, I realized that only the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches existed. As a Protestant, I too was taught from an early age that the practice of the Bible alone was practiced and taught by the early church, and all that God wanted us to know was in the written Scriptures.(the bible alone) In other words...... Sola Scriptura is the teaching, founded on the Scriptures themselves, that there is only one special revelation from God that man possesses today, the written Scriptures or the Bible. Again, this is what I beleived as a Protestant, until I studied futher into early church history. This is where that argument became a problem for me as a Protestant. (until I was led to the truth by The Holy Spirit)
    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.
     
  5. friend of

    friend of Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,846
    Canada
    Non-Denom
    Private
    I'd like to give a longer reply later but for now I'll just set up the discussion a bit.

    How does the Vatican interpret scripture and understand the will of God today if not through the Bible (ergo, Sola Scriptura)?

    What is conceptually different about the approach of the RCC when introducing doctrine, dand is this deference based on something outside of that which appears to my Protestant eye no more than an appeal to authority?
     
  6. bbbbbbb

    bbbbbbb Well-Known Member

    +9,548
    Non-Denom
    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.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  7. Erose

    Erose Newbie

    +1,177
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    The Catholic Church received the will of God straight from Jesus Christ and that will has been passed on from one generation to the next. It is called the Deposit of Faith or Sacred Tradition, and Scripture is part of the Deposit of Faith, and not the sum of that Faith. To us the true Word of God is a Man who is God, our Lord Jesus Christ. It is through Him and His Apostles that we received the full Deposit of Faith.

    The purpose of the office of the Pope, is not to set doctrine for the Church. No his role doctrinally is to safeguard the Deposit of Faith that has been handed down to us from the beginning. You will not find a single instance were a pope established a new doctrine for the Church. It just doesn't exist.
     
  8. Phil 1:21

    Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +4,328
    Christian
    Married
    Um...because only one of them is God.
     
  9. Major1

    Major1 Well-Known Member

    +2,297
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Correct. It is called the "Infallibility of the Pope".

    In its most strict application, the attribute of infallibility is possessed supereminently, and essentially, in no one but God, Who is Absolute Truth. By way of a gift, or a sharing, this divine prerogative has been granted by the Author of creation to an office, occupied by the Papacy.
    The Infallibility of the Pope — Basic Facts About an Essential Dogma
     
  10. Stabat Mater

    Stabat Mater Jesus Christ conquers! Supporter

    +6,509
    Holy See (vatican City State)
    Traditional. Cath.
    Single
    Well enjoy your reductionism.
     
  11. friend of

    friend of Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,846
    Canada
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Do you endorse all statements Pope Francis has made in official capacity pertaining to RCC's stances on issues to date?
     
  12. Phil 1:21

    Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +4,328
    Christian
    Married
    Exodus 20:1-5
     
  13. Stabat Mater

    Stabat Mater Jesus Christ conquers! Supporter

    +6,509
    Holy See (vatican City State)
    Traditional. Cath.
    Single
    One charge made against it is that the saints in heaven cannot even hear our prayers, making it useless to ask for their intercession. However, this is not true. As Scripture indicates, those in heaven are aware of the prayers of those on earth. This can be seen, for example, in Revelation 5:8, where John depicts the saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of "golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints." But if the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God, then they must be aware of our prayers. They are aware of our petitions and present them to God by interceding for us.

    Some might try to argue that in this passage the prayers being offered were not addressed to the saints in heaven, but directly to God. Yet this argument would only strengthen the fact that those in heaven can hear our prayers, for then the saints would be aware of our prayers even when they are not directed to them!

    In any event, it is clear from Revelation 5:8 that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us. We are explicitly told by John that the incense they offer to God are the prayers of the saints. Prayers are not physical things and cannot be physically offered to God. Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally. In other words, they are interceding.

    Taken from;
    Praying to the Saints | Catholic Answers
     
  14. Erose

    Erose Newbie

    +1,177
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    The statements the Pope makes should be in line with Catholic Doctrine. I know that he will make statements that are political in nature, and many of these are of his own opinion. Again, the pope does not have the authority to create doctrine, only to defend it.
     
  15. Erose

    Erose Newbie

    +1,177
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    This isn't true. The Catholic belief is that all Divine Revelation ended with the last Apostle's death. The development of doctrine, is based upon the Church's meditation upon that Divine Revelation over the last 2000 years. No new doctrine is developed, rather a better understanding of that doctrine. A parable, if you will, it is much like when you are driving down the road, and at a distance you see a sign, you aren't sure what the sign says at the distance you see it. As you get closer the sign becomes clearer and clearer until you know exactly what that sign means. This is what the development of doctrine is like. The doctrine is already there, but centuries of some of the greatest minds in history meditating upon that doctrine, allows us to more fully understand what that doctrine means.

    A perfect example of this is when you look at the history of the development of the Doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation. The Church didn't invent anything new during that time concerning these critical doctrines, but rather the Church fleshed out what these Doctrines meant, and defined them better than they were defined in the past.
     
  16. Major1

    Major1 Well-Known Member

    +2,297
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Care then to explain "Public and Private Revelations?

    Isn't it true my friend that while many purported apparitions, visions, etc., are ultimately discredited, other private revelations, even in our time, have been approved by the Church.
     
  17. Phil 1:21

    Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +4,328
    Christian
    Married
    I'll stick with worshiping the Creator, not the creation.
     
  18. Erose

    Erose Newbie

    +1,177
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    Public Revelation is the Deposit of Faith given to us by Christ and His Apostles. There will be no more Public Revelation until the second coming of Christ. Concerning private revelations, the Church is opened to the fact that God, Jesus, an angel or Saint, can reveal themselves to individual people. In the these cases, the Church doesn't really make a claim on whether or not the apparition really happened, what it does is see if what was "revealed" conflict with the Public Revelation. Also it does attempt to see if they can debunk the apparition by sending a team of skeptics to determine whether or not there is a natural reason for the event, i.e. mental issues, natural occurrence that can be confused with the supernatural, fraud, etc.

    Anyway when the private revelation has gone through the ringer, and there is no natural explanation found for the event, the Church may proclaim that Christians may believe that it occurred. No Catholic is required to believe in any of the private apparitions, nor is private revelation used to set doctrine.
     
  19. Stabat Mater

    Stabat Mater Jesus Christ conquers! Supporter

    +6,509
    Holy See (vatican City State)
    Traditional. Cath.
    Single
    I don't know to whom you're talking, but I've not forwarded any recommendation of such.

    Don't you believe in the communion of saints?
     
  20. bbbbbbb

    bbbbbbb Well-Known Member

    +9,548
    Non-Denom
    There is, of course, a vast difference between the communion of saints and the communication to dead people.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...