st cyprian catholic church

With all due respect, the Bible says that the Church must be one and the original one founded by Jesus and the apostles is the Catholic Church. Why do you disagree that we are to be united as Jesus and the Father are one?

John 10:16 - there shall be one fold and one shepherd
John 17:17-23 - I pray that they may be one, as we are one
John 17:23 - that they may be brought to perfection as one
Romans 12:5 - we, though many, are one body in Christ
Romans 15:5 - God grant you to think in harmony with one another
Romans 16:17 - avoid those who create dissensions
1 Corinthians 1:10 - I urge you that there be no divisions among you
1 Corinthians 12:13 - in one spirit we were baptized into one body
Ephesians 4:4-6 -There is one Body, one Spirit, just as one hope is the goal of your calling by God. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father of all, over all, through all and within all.
Philippians 2:2 - be of same mind, united in heart, thinking one thing
Colossians 3:15 - the peace into which you were called in one body

St. Cyprian (c. 250AD) - "God is one and Christ in one, and one is His Church, and the faith is one, and His people welded together by the glue of concord into a solid unity of body. Unity cannot be rent asunder, nor can the one body of the Church, through the division of its structure, be divided into separate pieces." (On the Unity of the Church, 23)

Tertullian (c. 197AD) - "We are a society with a single religious feeling, a single unity of discipline, a single bond of hope," (Apology 39, 1)

St. Hilary (c. 4th century) - "In the Scriptures our people are shown to be made one, so that just as many grains collected into one and ground and mingled together, make one loaf, so in Christ, who is the heavenly bread, we know there is one holy, in which our whole company is joined and united" (Treatise 62, 13)
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION WITH AN ANSWER THAT JUSTIFIES YOUR DISOBEDIENCE TO GOD'S WILL TO BE ONE IN HIS CHURCH? IF YOU CANNOT JUSTIFY IT JUST BE HONEST AND SAY SO.
ADDITIONAL iNFORMATION: THE ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT IS ABOUT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AS THERE WAS NO OTHER UNTIL THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. SO, IF YOU READ THE nEW TESTAMENT, YOU ARE READING ABOUT THE CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST. IF YOU THINK THER IS ANOTHER GIVE SOME PROOF. I AM HARD TO DECEIVE SINCE I WAS A PROTESTANT TRAINED PROFESSOR OF EARLY ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY WITH A MDIV FROM A BAPTIST SEMINARY AND A PHD FROM A METHODIST ONE. 25 YEARS AS A PROTESTANT MINISTER (MORAVIAN) BEFORE CONVERTING TO CATHOLIC CHRISTIANITY.
BibleChooser: Since you are so confused about what is the Church I thought you can learn from this writing in my blog that describes the Church:

http://fiatvolvntastua.blogspot.com/2009 /06/church-is-both-visible-and-invisible .html

Pretty sad, isn't it? C.S. Lewis used an illustration that I've always liked, and it goes something as follows: "The real dog never says to the toy dog, 'I'm just as good as you.'"

That's why fundamentalists have to lash out at Christ's true Church on earth, while Catholics seldom feel the need to attack their separated brothers and sisters in Christ. We know that the Catholic Faith is what Jesus intended His Church to be, and no amount of bashing or arguing by fundamentalists will ever change that.

Pray for them. God was gracious enough to lead me out of a "toy church" into the True Faith, and He can do it for others.

Edit:

((((Tallulah))))

2009-07-09 16:31:21 by cristoiglesia

It is often argued the St. Cyprian did not affirm Catholic ecclesiology because he disagreed with Stephen and never taught the Papacy. In short ...

Question: "If the Orthodox faith is the only true faith, can Christians of other confessions be saved? May a person who has led a perfectly righteous life on earth be saved on the strength of his ancestry, while not being baptized as Christian?

Answer: "For He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth [struggleth], but of God that showeth mercy" (Rom. 9:15-16). In the Orthodox Church we have the path of salvation indicated to us and we are given the means by which a person maybe morally purified and have a direct promise of salvation. In this sense St. Cyprian of Carthage says that "outside the Church there is no salvation." In the Church is given that of which Apostle Peter writes to Christians (and only Christians): "According as His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge, and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience, and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. 1:3-8). And what should one say of those outside the Church, who do not belong to her? Another apostle provides us with an idea: "For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth" (1 Cor. 5:12-13). God "will have mercy on whom He will have mercy" (Rom 9:18). It is necessary to mention only one thing: that to "lead a perfectly righteous life," as the questioner expressed it, means to live according to the commandments of the Beatitudes—which is beyond the power of one, outside the Orthodox Church, without the help of grace which is concealed within it.

The question: Can the heterodox, i.e. those who do, not belong to Orthodoxy—the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church—be saved, has become particularly painful and acute in our days.

In attempting to answer this question, it is necessary, first of all, to recall that in His Gospel the Lord Jesus Christ Himself mentions but one state of the human soul which unfailingly leads to perdition—i.e. blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:1-32). The Holy Spirit is, above all, the Spirit of Truth, as the Saviour loved to refer to Him. Accordingly, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is blasphemy against the Truth, conscious and persistent opposition to it. The same text makes it clear that even blasphemy against the Son of Man—i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God Himself may be forgiven men, as it may be uttered in error or in ignorance and, subsequently may be covered by conversion and repentance (an example of such a converted and repentant blasphemer is the Apostle Paul. (See Acts 26:11 and I Tim. 1:13.) If, however, a man opposes the Truth which he clearly apprehends by his reason and, conscience, he becomes blind and commits spiritual suicide, for he thereby likens himself to the devil, who believes in God and dreads Him, yet hates, blasphemes, and opposes Him.

Thus, man's refusal to accept the Divine Truth and his opposition thereto makes him a son of damnation. Accordingly, in sending His disciples to preach, the Lord told them: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mk. 16:16), for the latter heard the Lord's Truth and was called upon to accept it, yet refused, thereby inheriting the damnation of those who "believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (II Thes. 2:12).

The Holy Orthodox Church is the repository of the divinely revealed Truth in all its fullness and fidelity to apostolic Tradition. Hence, he who leaves the Church, who intentionally and consciously falls away from it, joins the ranks of its opponents and becomes a renegade as regards apostolic Tradition. The Church dreadfully anathematized such renegades, in accordance with the words of the Saviour Himself (Matt. 18:17) and of the Apostle Paul (Gal. 1:8-9), threatening them with e ternal damnation and calling them to return to the Orthodox fold. It is self evident, however, that sincere Christians who are Roman Catholics, or Lutherans, or members, of other non-Orthodox confessions, cannot be termed renegades or heretics—i.e. those who knowingly pervert the truth...* They have been born and raised and are living according to the creed which they have inherited, just as do the majority of you who are Orthodox; in their lives there has not been a moment of personal and conscious renunciation of Orthodoxy. The Lord, "Who will have all men to be saved" (I Tim. 2:4) and "Who enlightens every man born into the world" (Jn. 1.43), undoubtedly is leading them also towards salvation In His own way.

With reference to the above question, it is particularly instructive to recall the answer once given to an inquirer by the Blessed Theophan the Recluse. The blessed one replied more or less thus: "You ask, will the heterodox be saved... Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins... I will tell you one thing, however: should you, being Orthodox and possessing the Truth in its fullness, betray Orthodoxy, and enter a different faith, you will lose your soul forever."

We believe the foregoing answer by the saintly ascetic to be the best that can be given in this matter.

* The Greek word for "heresy" is derived from the word for "choice" and hence inherently implies conscious, willful rejection or opposition to the Divine Truth manifest in the Orthodox Church.
From Orthodox Life, Vol. 34, No. 6 (Nov.-Dec., 1984), pp. 33-36.

Who is saved is up to God. He tells us in the Bible what we must do to be saved. In Acts 2:38 Peter tells those who are cut to the heart for their sins to "Repent and be baptized every one of you, for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." There are many other commands that are given in the New Law that we must follow. I suppose if these people follow God's Word, they will be saved, but I can not judge, since I am merely a human. That judgment is reserved for Him. Be assured, though. We will all be required to give account of our actions on this earth.

2007-11-16 09:20:56 by Jacob Dahlen

Price: $24.95

The Catholics have maintained that Peter was the rock referred to in Matthew 16:18. Many Protestants and fundamentalists, however, argued that the rock referred to Jesus Christ and not Peter. They used the "petros and petra" or “little rock and big rock” argument saying that the Greek word "petros" meant a pebble or a small piece of rock referring to Peter and "petra" meant a big slab of rock which referred to Jesus as the foundation of the Church.

However, early Christian fathers were saying the following in reference to Matthew 16:18:

Tertullian (220 A.D.):

"Was anything hid from Peter, who was called the Rock, whereon the Church was built; who obtained the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the power of loosing and of binding in heaven and on earth?" (Tertullian, De Praescript Haeret).

Origen (230-250 A.D.):

"See what the Lord said to Peter, that great foundation of the Church, and most solid Rock, upon which Christ founded the Church ..." (Origen, In Exodus. Hom. v. . 4 tom. ii).

"Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church [Matt. 16:18]. And what does our Lord say to him? 'Oh you of little faith,' he says, 'why do you doubt?'" [Matt. 14:31] (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

"Upon him (Peter), as on the earth, the Church was founded." (Origen, Ep. ad. Rom. lib. v.c. 10, tom iv.)

"Peter, upon whom is built Christ's Church, against which the gates of hell will not prevail." (Origen, T. iv. In Joan. Tom. v.)
St. Cyprian (246 A.D.):

"For first to Peter, upon whom He built the Church, and from whom He appointed and showed that unity should spring ..." (Cyprian, Ep. lxxiiii ad Fubaian).

"God is one, and Christ is one, and the Church is one, and the Chair (of Peter) is one, by the Lord's word, upon a Rock ..." (Cyprian, Ep. xl. ad Pleb).

"Peter, also to whom the Lord commends His sheep to be fed and guarded, on whom He laid the foundation of the Church ...." (Cyprian, De Habitu Virg).

The people I quoted above, like many early Christians, must have spoken Koine Greek. And we can see that they did not have any problem in understanding that the rock referred to Peter in Matthew 16:18. Note that the above quotes were said before the Bible was compiled in the fourth century.

Who is more credible in the translation of Matthew 16:18? The early Christian fathers who spoke Koine Greek...or the present day fundies who speak English but claim to be experts in the Greek language?
I NOTICED THAT MOST OF THOSE WHO ANSWERED IGNORED THE QUOTED WRITINGS OF TERTULLIAN, ORIGEN AND ST. CYPRIAN.

DO YOU THINK THESE EARLY CHRISTIANS WERE WRONG?

WHO IS MORE CREDIBLE IN TRANSLATING MATTHEW 16:18? THE EARLY CHRISTIAN FATHERS WHO SPOKE KOINE GREEK...OR THE PRESENT DAY FUNDIES WHO SPEAK ENGLISH BUT CLAIM TO BE EXPERTS IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE?
Somebody answered:

<It doesn't matter what the "Church Fathers" wrote on the matter because they were not inspired by God. Only the Scriptures are inspired by God.>

The writings may not be divinely inspired but the Gospel of Matthew is. These Chruch Fathers interpreted the verse according to the teachings of the Apostles of Jesus.
Somebody answered:

<It doesn't matter what the "Church Fathers" wrote on the matter because they were not inspired by God. Only the Scriptures are inspired by God.>

The writings may not be divinely inspired but the Gospel of Matthew is. These Chruch Fathers interpreted the verse according to the teachings of the Apostles of Jesus.

Your interpretation is not divinely inspired either.

As a protestant, I was taught that The Rock was revelation knowledge, and that Peter was actually lower in status than James (whose statement apparently settled the argument found in Acts 15).

The problem with that approach is: We finally figured this out 1900-years after it happened? We have a better understanding of the language and customs and teachings of the Church than those within a generation or two of our Lord?

That's one of the big reasons I'm an ex-protestant. What I was taught was wrong, and now I've got a whole moose-load of catching up to do.

2010-01-04 18:08:17 by Christian