You're wrong of course.. There is only one church from the beginning.. There can only BE one church.. There can be CLUBS however.. Jesus did not forbid clubs.. but only one church is possible.. What is the Holy Spirit, a moron?..
The church is of people called out of the clubs.. or even the world extant.. after all buddism is a club too.. You seem to have removed the Holy Spirit out of the loop, your loop..
Naah! the church is doing fine, always has been too.. The clubs however are always wrangling about something.. Many clubs do not allow the Holy Spirit in their buildings.. Oh! well, their loss.. By the way Im serious as a heart attack..
The RCC(club) became solid or chartered about 313A.D.
Really? And where might we find this little historical "fact"?
I've read some of the Christian writings from before, during, and after that time (Eusebius, etc.) Funny how I don't seem to recall anything about it.
Strangely, I just posted something on another thread which is applicable here as a reply to your post. Here it is:
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether [we be] Jews or Gentiles, whether [we be] bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many.
If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body [were] an eye, where [were] the hearing? If the whole [were] hearing, where [were] the smelling?
But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
And if they were all one member, where [were] the body? But now [are they] many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
And those [members] of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely [parts] have more abundant comeliness. For our comely [parts] have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that [part] which lacked:
That there should be no schism in the body; but [that] the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
[Are] all apostles? [are] all prophets? [are] all teachers? [are] all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. – I Corinthians 12:12-31
Have you ever heard a preacher who did not have the gift of preaching? He does more harm than good.
The same holds for any person, council or assembly that holds itself to be the head of the body of Christ, the church. Christ is the head of the church. So when any one or any thing tries to be the head of the body of Christ, the result is more harm than good.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.
For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.– Colossians 1:15-20
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.
Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?
Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. – Colossians 2:16—23
For ye are yet carnal: for whereas [there is] among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I [am] of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who [is] Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. – I Corinthians 3:1-7
As far as you continued insistance on the erroneous claim that “the Catholic Church” (or, I guess you’d say, “club”?!?) became “chartered” in 313, I’ll have to respectfully disagree on the basis of those pesky little things called facts (a tough pill to swallow, I’m sure).
In that year (313) the joint Roman emperors Constantine and Licinius issued the so-called Edict of Milan that proclaimed religious toleration throughout the whole the Empire. That’s the kiddie history 101 version. Actually, edicts of religious toleration had already been issued incrementally throughout the divided Empire: for Gaul, Spain and Britain by Constantine in 306; for Italy and North Africa by Maxentius in the same year; and for the Balkans by the Galerius and Licinius in 311. The letter of 313 (often called the Edict of Milan) was circulated among the Roman governors of the East and did nothing more than to proclaim the Roman government’s neutrality regarding the practice of religion.
So, I am confused as to how, exactly, this date would be chosen and set up as being the point at which, in your words, “The RCC(club) became solid or chartered.”
As to your claim that “There is only one church from the beginning”, it may startle you to know that the Catholic Church would totally agree with you on that point. For your edification, here’s the “official” Catholic teaching on the matter (from 2000’s “DOMINUS IESUS”: ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH):
16. The Lord Jesus, the only Saviour, did not only establish a simple community of disciples, but constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: he himself is in the Church and the Church is in him (cf. Jn 15:1ff.; Gal 3:28; Eph 4:15-16; Acts 9:5). Therefore, the fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery belongs also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord. Indeed, Jesus Christ continues his presence and his work of salvation in the Church and by means of the Church (cf. Col 1:24-27), which is his body (cf. 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Col 1:18). And thus, just as the head and members of a living body, though not identical, are inseparable, so too Christ and the Church can neither be confused nor separated, and constitute a single “whole Christ”. This same inseparability is also expressed in the New Testament by the analogy of the Church as the Bride of Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:25-29; Rev 21:2,9).
Therefore, in connection with the unicity and universality of the salvific mediation of Jesus Christ, the unicity of the Church founded by him must be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic faith. Just as there is one Christ, so there exists a single body of Christ, a single Bride of Christ: “a single Catholic and apostolic Church”. Furthermore, the promises of the Lord that he would not abandon his Church (cf. Mt 16:18; 28:20) and that he would guide her by his Spirit (cf. Jn 16:13) mean, according to Catholic faith, that the unicity and the unity of the Church — like everything that belongs to the Church’s integrity — will never be lacking.
The Catholic faithful are required to profess that there is an historical continuity — rooted in the apostolic succession — between the Church founded by Christ and the Catholic Church: “This is the single Church of Christ... which our Saviour, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care (cf. Jn 21:17), commissioning him and the other Apostles to extend and rule her (cf. Mt 28:18ff.), erected for all ages as ‘the pillar and mainstay of the truth’ (1 Tim 3:15). This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him”. With the expression subsistit in, the Second Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church, and on the other hand, that “outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth”, that is, in those Churches and ecclesial communities which are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church. But with respect to these, it needs to be stated that “they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.
17. Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him. The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches. Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.
On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church. Baptism in fact tends per se toward the full development of life in Christ, through the integral profession of faith, the Eucharist, and full communion in the Church.
“The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection — divided, yet in some way one — of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists, and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and ecclesial communities must strive to reach”. In fact, “the elements of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other communities”. “Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.
The lack of unity among Christians is certainly a wound for the Church; not in the sense that she is deprived of her unity, but “in that it hinders the complete fulfilment of her universality in history”.
The Catholic Church dates back to the First Century as does the Church of Rome. The name itself, of course, dates only to the 18th Century. Still most Anglicans simply referred to the Church of Rome with which they were in schism. Even the Reformers accepted the antiquity of the Roman Church —how could they not, or was Paul addressing a fiction— though they asserted that it had succumbed to radical error. The Orthodox probably mark the birth of Roman Catholicism, or papalism, at the schism of the 11th Century.
lol. Yep. God draws His own to Him perfectly and at a time and method of His own choosing from among all races and nations and "clubs."
All churches on earth need to conform to the word of God, and many fail a lot more grievously than others. But no church is perfect. Only Christ is perfect.