Posted on 11/03/2011 2:50:35 AM PDT by markomalley
“Catholics are the ORIGINAL Christians and every breakaway sect can be traced to a PERSON who started it!!”
There was no Catholic church for at least the first 200 years of Christianity.
Early Christianity was initially a branch of Judaism and they didn’t see themselves as a separate religion. Of course it is a distinct religion and that happened when, in order to be a Christian, you didn’t have to be a Jew. When that occurred, they were no longer branches of the same religion. In Jewish thought, “messiah” does not mean God. There was a different understanding of it at the time, and were in fact many people who were thought to perhaps be the messiah.
The Sacrament of Penance scares a lot of kids. I went to Catholic school so we went to Penance once a week. Our religion teacher said that we weren’t spending enough time in the confessional and needed to really reflect on our sins for that week. We panicked! As we stood in line... waiting for our turn, we “shared” sins as a way to remind us if we did that particular sin. For example, Michael said, “I hurt my Mom’s feelings by telling her that I hate her meatloaf”. Several of the kids would say... “Wow, I did something similar with a pot pie.. I’ll use that one”. I have always wondered what the priest really thought when he heard the same sins that sounded alike but just a tad different?! Either that... or he thought that all the Moms completely wrecked their cooking that week!
Geesh....Peter was given the “job” of Pope....we can trace ALL the Popes to the present.....look it up, it’s in all the books!!
I’m sure someone named “Rev. Marsha” is an expert on who is a real Christian-lol.
“cool assembly of God” — yeah... right...
Ignatius of Antioch described himself as "the bishop of the Catholic Church in Syria," ca AD 107. Obviously he would disagree with you.
The first surviving written use of the word is in his letters.
If Peter was the first Pope, then why the focus on Rome? Paul was the Apostle to the Christian Gentiles in Rome, not Peter. Peter was the head of the Church in Jerusalem.
I've always wondered about this, because it seems fairly straightforward that if the Bishop of Rome is to be the head of the Church, then Peter should have been the first Bishop of Rome. But he was the Bishop of Jerusalem, Paul was the Bishop of Rome.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of the "incorporation doctrine" in re to the First Amendment. But if it's the law of the land, it had better be applied equally. A Catholic teacher who handed out anti-Protestant or anti-Mormon tracts ought to be severely disciplined or fired as well. Ditto for an atheist teacher who handed out anti-religious pamphlets.
Paul never called himself the "bishop of Rome". He went there under duress, you'll recall; he wasn't sent to Rome by the church. At least a couple of the early church fathers refer to the church at Rome as founded by Peter and Paul, however.
Great, “Creative Writing” class in the 6th grade. How many of the students can compose a basic expository paragraph, I wonder? How many can even read a basic expository paragraph?
Those early Christians - Jews and Greeks - were Catholics.
You wrote:
“There was no Catholic church for at least the first 200 years of Christianity.”
Then explain to me how St. Ignatius of Antioch could mention it in writing in AD 107-110. Can you do that?
Things were more complicated than you apparently know.
Read Acts 15:7.
You did make a note though that Peter appointed a successor and moved to Rome from Antioch. What part of the Scripture is this located in, I don't recognize this.
As for Paul not wanting to go to Rome, I know he didn't want to go but when the Father says you're going to go somewhere, we mortals don't really have much say in the matter now do we?
Also, I misspoke earlier when I stated that Paul was the Bishop of Rome. I should have stated that Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles and did a good portion of his writing from Rome. I would imagine, considering the text of the book of Romans, that he was the leader of the Church in Rome as well due to the way that he presented himself and argued from authority on matters of doctrine.
Okay? Acts 15:7 describes an event that takes place in Jerusalem. Are you denying that Peter was called to preach to the Gentiles in Jerusalem as well as the Jews? I think you’re reaching here.
Catholic means universal ... not Roman ...
If that were true, it would be documented in Acts ... it is not.
Catholic with a little 'c' ...
I am not reaching at all. Peter preached to ANYONE who would listen. He did not just preach to Gentiles or just Jews. The Church in Rome was most likely among Jews first. Peter would have preached to them first. He would have also preached to Gentiles, however, because he too had been given a commission to preach to them.
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.