THE TRUE CHURCH

Where is this one true Church? What is this one true Church like? What are the marks by which this one true Church may be known? You may well ask such questions. Give me your attention, and I will provide you with some answers.

1. The one true Church IS COMPOSED OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE LORD JESUS. It is made up of all God's elect - of all converted men and women - of all true Christians. In whomsoever we can discern the election of God the Father, the sprinkling of the blood of God the Son, the sanctifying work of God the Spirit, in that person we see a member of Christ's true Church.

2. It is a Church OF WHICH ALL THE MEMBERS HAVE THE SAME MARKS. They are all born again of the Spirit; they all possess "repentance towards God, faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ," and holiness of life and conversation. They all hate sin, and they all love Christ. (They worship differently, and after various fashions; some worship with a form of prayer, and some with none; some worship kneeling, and some standing; but they all worship with one heart.) They are all led by one Spirit; they all build upon one foundation; they all draw their religion from one single book - that is the Bible. They are all joined to one great center - that is Jesus Christ. They all even now can say with one heart, "Hallelujah;" and they can all respond with one heart and voice, Amen and Amen.

3. It is a Church WHICH IS DEPENDENT UPON NO MINISTERS UPON EARTH, however much it values those who preach the gospel to its members. The life of its members does not hang upon Church-membership, or baptism, or the Lord's Supper - although they highly value these things when they are to be had. But it has only one Great Head - one Shepherd, one chief Bishop - and that is Jesus Christ. He alone, By His Spirit, admits the members of this Church, though ministers may show the door. Till He opens the door no man on earth can open it - neither bishops, nor presbyters, nor convocations, nor synods. Once let a man repent and believe the gospel, and that moment he becomes a member of this Church. Like the penitent thief, he may have no opportunity of being baptized; but he has that which is far better than any water-baptism - the baptism of the Spirit. He may not be able to receive the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper;but he eats Christ's body and drinks Christ's blood by faith every day he lives, and no minister on earth can prevent him. He may be ex-communicated by ordained men, and cut off from the outward ordinances of the professing Church; but all the ordained men in the world cannot shut him out of the true Church.

It is a Church whose existence does not depend on forms, ceremonies, cathedrals, churches, chapels, pulpits, fonts, vestments, organs, endowments, money, kings, governments, magistrates or any act of favor whatsoever from the hand of man. It has often lived on and continued when all these things have been taken from it. It has often been driven into the wilderness, or into dens and caves of the earth, by those who ought to have been its friends. Its existence depends on nothing but the presence of Christ and His Spirit; and they being ever with it, the Church cannot die.

4. This is the Church TO WHICH THE SCRIPTURAL TITLES OF PRESENT HONOR AND PRIVILEGE, AND THE PROMISES OF FUTURE GLORY ESPECIALLY BELONG; this is the Body of Christ; this is the flock of Christ; this is the household of faith and the family of God; this is God's building, God's foundation, and the temple of the Holy Ghost. This is the Church of the first-born, whose names are written in heaven; this is the royal priesthood, the chosen generation, the peculiar people, the purchased possession, the habitation of God, the light of the world, the salt and the wheat of the earth; this is the "Holy Catholic Church" of the Apostles' Creed; this is the "One Catholic and Apostolic Church" of the Nicene Creed; this is that Church to which the Lord Jesus promises "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it," and to which He says, "I am with you always, even unto the end of the world"(Matt.16:18; 28:2).

5. This is the only Church WHICH POSSESSES TRUE UNITY. Its members are entirely agreed on all the weightier matters of religion, for they are all taught by one Spirit. About God, and Christ, and the Spirit, and sin, and their own hearts, and faith, and repentance, and necessity of holiness, and the value of the Bible, and the importance of prayer, and the resurrection, and judgment to come - about all these points they are of one mind. Take three or four of them, strangers to one another, from the remotest corners of the earth; examine them separately on these points: you will find them all one judgment.

6. This is the only Church WHICH POSSESSES TRUE SANCTITY. Its members are all holy. They are not merely holy by profession, holy in name, and holy in the judgment of charity; they are all holy in act, and deed, and reality, and life, and truth. They are all more or less conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. No unholy man belongs to this Church.

7. This is the only Church WHICH IS TRULY CATHOLIC. It is not the Church of any one nation or people; its members are to be found in every part of the world where the gospel is received and believed. It is not confined within the limits of any one country, or pent up within the pale of any particular forms of outward government. In it there is no difference between Jew and Greek, black man and white, Episcopalian and Presbyterian - but faith in Christ is all. Its members will be gathered from north, and south, and east, and west, and will be of every name and tongue - but all one in Jesus Christ.

8. This is the only Church WHICH IS TRULY APOSTOLIC. It is built on the foundation laid by the Apostles, and holds the doctrines which they preached. The two grand objects at which its members aim are apostolic faith and apostolic practice; and they consider the man who talks of following the Apostles without possessing these two things to be no better than sounding brass and tinkling cymbal.

9. This is the only Church WHICH IS CERTAIN TO ENDURE UNTO THE END. Nothing can altogether overthrow and destroy it. Its members may be persecuted, oppressed, imprisoned, beaten, beheaded, burned; but the true Chruch is never altogether extinguished; it rises again from its afflictions; it lives on through fire and water. When crushed in one land it springs up in another. The Pharaohs, the Herods, the Neros, the Bloody Marys, have labored in vain to put down this Church; they slay their thousands, and then pass away and go to their own place. The true Church outlives them all, and sees them buried each in his turn. It is an anvil that has broken many a hammer in this world, and will break many a hammer still; it is a bush which is often burning, and yet it's not consumed.

10. This is the only Church OF WHICH NO ONE MEMBER CAN PERISH. Once enrolled in the lists of this Church, sinners are safe for eternity; they are never cast away. The election of God the Father, the continual intercession of God the Son, the daily renewing and sanctifying power of God the Holy Ghost, surround and fence them in like a garden enclosed. Not one bone of Christ's mystical Body shall ever be broken; not one lamb of Christ's flock shall ever be plucked out of His hand.

11. This is the Church WHICH DOES THE WORK OF CHRIST UPON EARTH. Its members are a little flock, and few in numbers, compared with the children of the world; one or two here, and two or three there - a few in this place and few in that. But these are they who shake the universe; these are they who change the fortunes of kingdoms by their prayers; these are they who are the active workers for spreading the knowledge of pure religion and undefiled; these are the life-blood of a country, the shield, the defence, the stay, and the support of any nation to which they belong.

12. This is the Church WHICH SHALL BE TRULY GLORIOUS AT THE END. When all earthly glory is passsed away then shall this Church be presented without spot before God the Father's throne. Thrones, principalities, and powers upon earth shall come to nothing; dignities, and offices, and endowments shall all pass away; but the Church of the first-born shall shine as the stars at the last, and be presented with joy before the Father's throne, in the day of Christ's appearing. When the Lord's jewels are made up, and manifestation of the sons of God takes place, Episcopacy, and Presbyterianism, and Congregationalism will not be mentioned; one Church only will be named, and that is the Church of the elect.

13. Reader, THIS IS THE TRUE CHURCH TO WHICH A MAN MUST BELONG, IF HE WOULD BE SAVED. Till you belong to this, you are nothing better than a lost soul. You may have the form, the husk, the skin, and the shell of religion, but you have not got the substance and the life. Yes, you may have countless outward privileges; you may enjoy great light, and knowledge - but if you do not belong to the Body of Christ, your light and knowledge and privileges will not save your soul. Alas, for the ignorance that prevails on this point! Men fancy if they join this church or that church, and become communicants, and go through certain forms, that all must be right in their souls. It is an utter delusion, it is a gross mistake. All were not Israel who were called Israel, and all are not members of Christ's Body who profess themselves Christian. TAKE NOTICE; you may be a staunch Episcopalian, or Presbyterian, or Independent, or Baptist, or Wesleyan, or Plymouth Brother - and yet not belong to the true Church. And if you do not, it will be better at last if you had never been born.

"What does Baptism signify? "

Of the Spirit, or by water?

"What sacraments exist? "

Good question

"Are sacraments necessary for slavation? "

I guess if you're a "slave" to sacraments they would be necessary for "slavation"(Is saliva necessary for salivation?)

"Is there an ordained priesthood? "

actually two. one ordained by Christ and one ordained by man

"Is homosexuality an acceptable lifestyle? "

seems to be in the priesthood ordained by man

"Is divorce acceptable? "

Would make the selling of anulnments kind of foolish if it wasn't

"Does life begin at conception? "

Some early Catholic Theologians and Popes believed it started at day 40

"Is praying in tongues (glossolalia) necessary, or even desirable? "

I stand on my corner with a cardboard sign saying "Will talk in tongues for food" For me it's necessary as a way of survival.

"Is Jesus present in the Eucharist? "

Scripture states that Jesus abides and dwells in all his believers. Does that make me a Eucharist?

"Is it proper to baptize babies? "

Maybe we should ask the babies? We might find the answer to the first question

"Should women be pastors? "

I could think of 100 snide remarks for this one but refuse until my asbestos suit returns from the dry cleaners... (I've been away from FR so long I forgot HTML)

No, Mar, I'm not ;) I'm Christian. That is to say I cut my teeth on scripture - not on philosophy. That is an irritation to the professional and casuel religianity crowds who seek religion to fill the emptiness in their lives instead of letting God do it. I am a Christian that knows scripture. I've studied religion and archeology as a hobby since 1988. All but 6 months of that time has been spent figuring out the Roman sect. That may seem excessive; but, when you understand how convoluted, contradictory and confusing Romanism is, it becomes more understandable why it has taken so much time.

I'll give you an example that may help clarify so as to remove a question as it were. When one begins to study anything, I was taught through school up to college to hit the books. And that I did. I established a rough outline of what I wanted to know and went through 50 books in quick order. With specific topics in mind, I went through each book and wrote down what each author had to say. I didn't digest it right away, I was merely being a recorder as it were. I soon learned from a priest to rely on books marked with the Nihil obstat and Imprimitur seals. These were to garauntee that what is written in the sealed volume was "doctrinally free of error". So, I relied upon that and went through several sorts of history. When I began digesting it and organizing my notes by topic instead of by the book they came from, my 500 pages of handwritten notes, typed documents, photocopies and drawings revealed what I wasn't prepared for - even Rome has no idea what it's teaching. The Nihil obstat and imprimitur are not actually a garauntee of freedom from error. It turns out that these seals mean the work is ok for Catholics to read and draw from to the exclusion of anything else. It took debating numerous Catholics at different sites over the last 4 years to see just how bad the situation is. Romanists don't know scripture and what they believe depends on which one you ask.

The case and point after setting this up is the explanation of the "eucharist". One source says it is a continuation of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. One says it's not a continuation but merely a figure of it. One says it's not a figure of it, but an actual recreation brought about by the priest. There are literally enough different versions of it that it is impossible to nail down the actual belief.
If you question Romanists on this, which version you get depends on a number of factors. One being, whether you know your stuff or not. Each position has a flaw in logic that is evident. And in a room full of Roman Catholics, it is literally possible, as I found out, to shoot through all the iterations in less than 20 minutes, shoot them all down and be left in the same position of not having a solid, viable answer that is without flaw. Essentially, It's like being blind folded, handed a rifle on a boat in rough seas and commanded to hit a target at range no bigger than a postage stamp while moving past it. Or it's like nailing jello to the wall. Take your pick.

Having taken 20 minutes to answer a seeming simple question, I hope I've given you a thourough enough answer to be clear not only as to my belief but as to how I have learned what I have. I'm about 4 chapters into my 3rd rewrite of a book on the subject and debating the worth of the effort and whether it might not be as well to web publish so it's free to any who want it. Or you can go read the Neverending story threads. I don't wish that on anyone; but, I recommend it to anyone who wants a birds eye view of what I've just described. When I brought up the decretals there, you'd have thought I'd castrated all the Roman Catholics in the room with a spoon. The shrieks are still a little amusing, though bruising at the time. Being a Christian in a Room full of Roman Catholic apologists is the nearest thing you'll come to understanding what Uriah felt when his troops fell back and left him surrounded. With that, I'll leave you to ask of me what you will or just snicker and nod ;)

I'll do you one better:

1 Corinthians 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

[13] Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

[14] I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

[15] Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

[16] And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

[17] For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

[18] For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

Paul literally and forcefully rejects preimminance of Any apostle in this passage - rebuking the congregation and telling them that such carnal thinking shows they have not progressed spiritually and are not ready to be taught the deep things of God as they are yet carnally minded. It becomes apparent that Rome hadn't read the scriptures when they made their grab for power. It left them with a blind spot a mile wide wherein anyone who knows scripture could broadside them.

Peter was commanded with the other remaining original apostles to evangelize the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James [the son] of Zebedee, and John his brother;

[3] Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James [the son] of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;

[4] Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

[5] These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into [any] city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

[6] But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

[7] And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

The house of Israel is very specific as is the reference to the "lost sheep". These are the scattered tribes of the earlier Diaspora who were taken captive and then scattered into Media, to Babylon, to India, Burma, ect. The old testament tells where they went and archeology esp. recently has managed to confirm this. The scattering paints a picture of where these apostles would be charged to preach - it leads them away from Rome, not into it. which is why Paul is commissioned. Paul's primary ministry was to the Gentile.

The more you know, the more the truth interferes with the fiction that has been created via philosophy and the ramblings of vain men seeking power. Peter was in Babylon for the writing of his first epistle. Paul reveals this by showing he isn't in Rome, much less in Italy when he wrote it. It is revealed in understanding that II Timothy and I Peter were written at the same time. Paul sent word to Ephesus, to Timothy to track down Mark and bring him to Rome. At the time, Mark was in Peter's employ as a scribe - writing I Peter. If we map Peter's travels and where scripture tells us he was before and after this, It very quickly becomes apparent that Peter may have had narrow opportunity to ever go to Rome; but, that the likelyhood given his ministry is highly dubious and greatly impractical. Given that the Roman Emperor literally evicted the Israelites from Rome in the latter time when it is argued he went to Rome in one of their versions of the tale, it begs the question of what in the world he'd be doing there in violation of his ministerial duty assigned him by Christ. By the time Peter was to have been there in Rome for many years, Paul states that the Jewish rabbis in Rome had heard about Christianity; but, didn't know what it was about and invited Paul to tell them. The upshot of this is blatent. If Peter was in Rome, there was no evidence that he was ministering to anyone else the Rabbis would have long since been offended and taken him to task.
So we can largely and quickly rule out the earlier years too. And all without having to leave scripture.

Matthew was misread, misinterpreted and mistaught to one end - to prop up Rome's vacant claims of singular or "primary" authority over the whole church in contravention of the order setup by Christ. Christ ordained teachers to carry on after he left - to raise up leaders that would answer to Christ - not to answer to a man here on earth. Christ gave equal authority to all the apostles - none greater than the others as you've noted.
And he assigned them specific charges. And none of it matches what Rome teaches any more than the Orthodox view matches that of Rome. If they'd learned Greek and scripture before defrauding everyone, they might have come up with something better; but, power corrupts and it's pursuit maddens. Sin is impatient. Idle feet move quickly to destruction and thus, in the lusted heat of the moment, they betrayed themselves for their own ignorance. The only reason they pulled it off to begin with is that the people back then did not have the access to written scripture that we have today - they didn't know any better. The only ones who did know better were the leaders of the different churches and even many of them were duped. Already blinded by their dabblings with philosophy, they gave ear to philosophy and it captured them. The Greeks weren't defrauded because they knew the language the scriptures were penned in. Rome couldn't so easily decieve them. The west fell. They still have a number of things wrong through their dabblings. But, that's another story.

So to answer your question properly, it is only necessary to know the saying "necessity is the mother of invention".
The inventing process though is not always pristine and when people ignorant of their subject attempt invention, - well, I'm sure you've seen the old newsreels of the men who early on attempted flight before the Wright brothers did it correctly. Imagine if they'd tried to take over China and Budhism instead of the Roman empire and Catholicism. They'd think themselves Shaulin masters for wearing orange robes and knowing a few "enlightened passages. The difference is that the Budhists were better versed and would have destroyed them. Grasshopper would have not only taken the stone from their hand, he'd have whupped 'em with it.. lol

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.