The origins of the RC Denomination?

PT2


(325AD) Letter of Constantine to the churches after the Council of Nicæa:

Having had full proof, in the general prosperity of the empire, how great the favor of God has been towards us, I have judged that it ought to be the first object of my endeavors, that unity of faith, sincerity of love, and community of feeling in regard to the worship of Almighty God, might be preserved among the highly favored multitude who compose the Catholic Church. And, inasmuch as this object could not be effectually and certainly secured, unless all, or at least the greater number of the bishops were to meet together, and a discussion of all particulars relating to oar most holy religion to take place; for this reason as numerous an assembly as possible has been convened, at which I myself was present, as one among yourselves (and far be it from me to deny that which is my greatest joy, that I am your fellow-servant), and every question received due and full examination, until that judgment which God, who sees all things, could approve, and which tended to unity and concord, was brought to light, so that no room was left for further discussion or controversy in relation to the faith.

(325AD) Letter of Constantine to the church of Alexandria:

But in order that this might be done, by divine admonition I assembled at the city of Nicaea most of the bishops; with whom I myself also, who am but one of you, and who rejoice exceedingly in being your fellow-servant, undertook the investigation of the truth.

(332AD) Letter of Constantine to the Synod of Tyre, Part 1:

Having, moreover, been informed of the circumstances of the case, partly by your letters, partly by those of our illustrious counts, Acacius and Strategius, after sufficient investigation I have written to the people of Antioch, suggesting the course which will be at once pleasing to God and advantageous for the Church. A copy of this I have ordered to be subjoined to this present letter, in order that ye yourselves may know what I thought fit, as an advocate of the cause of justice, to write to that people: since I find in your letter this proposal, that, in consonance with the choice of the people, sanctioned by your own desire, Eusebius the holy bishop of Caesarea should preside over and take the charge of the church at Antioch. Now the letters of Eusebius himself on this subject appeared to be strictly accordant with the order prescribed by the Church. Nevertheless it is expedient that your Prudences should be made acquainted with my opinion also.

(332AD) Letter of Constantine to the Synod of Tyre, Part 2:

I beseech you, therefore, in post haste, as the phrase goes, to assemble together, without any delay, in formal synod; so that you may support those who require your assistance. Heal the brethren who are in danger, restore unanimity to the divided members, and rectify the disorders of the Church while time permits; and thus restore to those great provinces the harmony which, alas! the arrogance of a few men has destroyed.

Nothing shall be omitted on my part to further the interests of our religion. I have done all that you recommended in your letters. I have sent to those bishops whom you specified, directing them to repair to the council for the purpose of deliberating with you upon ecclesiastical matters.

(332AD) Second Letter of Constantine to Eusebius:

I have most carefully perused your letter, and perceive that you have strictly conformed to the rule enjoined by the discipline of the Church.

I have written on this subject to the people of Antioch, and also to your colleagues in the ministry who had themselves consulted me in regard to this question; on reading which letters, your Holiness will easily discern, that, inasmuch as justice itself opposed their claims, I have written to them under divine direction.

(335AD) Fragment of the first letter of Constantine to Athanasius (only a fragment remains):

For if I learn that you have hindered or excluded any who claim to be admitted into communion with the Church, I will immediately send some one who shall depose you by my command, and shall remove you from your place.

(335AD) Letter to the Bishops assembled at Tyre:

But hasten, as I have already said, all of you to us as speedily as possible: and be assured that I shall endeavor with all my power to cause that what is contained in the Divine Law may be preserved inviolate, on which neither stigma nor reproach shall be able to fasten itself; and this will come to

pass when its enemies, who under cover of the sacred profession introduce numerous and diversified blasphemies, are dispersed, broken to pieces, and altogether annihilated.
 
From Got Questions:

The Roman Catholic Church contends that its origin is the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ in approximately AD 30. The Catholic Church proclaims itself to be the church that Jesus Christ died for, the church that was established and built by the apostles. Is that the true origin of the Catholic Church? On the contrary. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament will reveal that the Catholic Church does not have its origin in the teachings of Jesus or His apostles. In the New Testament, there is no mention of the papacy, worship/adoration of Mary (or the immaculate conception of Mary, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the assumption of Mary, or Mary as co-redemptrix and mediatrix), petitioning saints in heaven for their prayers, apostolic succession, the ordinances of the church functioning as sacraments, infant baptism, confession of sin to a priest, purgatory, indulgences, or the equal authority of church tradition and Scripture. So, if the origin of the Catholic Church is not in the teachings of Jesus and His apostles, as recorded in the New Testament, what is the true origin of the Catholic Church?



For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman Empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine provided religious toleration with the Edict of Milan in AD 313, effectively lifting the ban on Christianity. Later, in AD 325, Constantine called the Council of Nicea in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.



Constantine found that, with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse, not everyone would agree to forsake his or her religious beliefs to embrace Christianity. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities. Some clear examples of this are as follows:



(1) The Cult of Isis, an Egyptian mother-goddess religion, was absorbed into Christianity by replacing Isis with Mary. Many of the titles that were used for Isis, such as “Queen of Heaven,” “Mother of God,” and theotokos (“God-bearer”) were attached to Mary. Mary was given an exalted role in the Christian faith, far beyond what the Bible ascribes to her, in order to attract Isis worshippers to a faith they would not otherwise embrace. Many temples to Isis were, in fact, converted into temples dedicated to Mary. The first clear hints of Catholic Mariology occur in the writings of Origen, who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which happened to be the focal point of Isis worship.



(2) Mithraism was a religion in the Roman Empire in the 1st through 5th centuries AD. It was very popular among the Romans, especially among Roman soldiers, and was possibly the religion of several Roman emperors. While Mithraism was never given “official” status in the Roman Empire, it was the de facto official religion until Constantine and succeeding Roman emperors replaced Mithraism with Christianity. One of the key features of Mithraism was a sacrificial meal, which involved eating the flesh and drinking the blood of a bull. Mithras, the god of Mithraism, was “present” in the flesh and blood of the bull, and when consumed, granted salvation to those who partook of the sacrificial meal (this is known as theophagy, the eating of one’s god). Mithraism also had seven “sacraments,” making the similarities between Mithraism and Roman Catholicism too many to ignore. Church leaders after Constantine found an easy substitute for the sacrificial meal of Mithraism in the concept of the Lord’s Supper/Christian communion. Even before Constantine, some early Christians had begun to attach mysticism to the Lord’s Supper, rejecting the biblical concept of a simple and worshipful remembrance of Christ’s death and shed blood. The Romanization of the Lord’s Supper made the transition to a sacrificial consumption of Jesus Christ, now known as the Catholic Mass/Eucharist, complete.



(3) Most Roman emperors (and citizens) were henotheists. A henotheist is one who believes in the existence of many gods, but focuses primarily on one particular god or considers one particular god supreme over the other gods. For example, the Roman god Jupiter was supreme over the Roman pantheon of gods. Roman sailors were often worshippers of Neptune, the god of the oceans. When the Catholic Church absorbed Roman paganism, it simply replaced the pantheon of gods with the saints. Just as the Roman pantheon of gods had a god of love, a god of peace, a god of war, a god of strength, a god of wisdom, etc., so the Catholic Church has a saint who is “in charge” over each of these, and many other categories. Just as many Roman cities had a god specific to the city, so the Catholic Church provided “patron saints” for the cities.



(4) The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. With the city of Rome being the center of government for the Roman Empire, and with the Roman emperors living in Rome, the city of Rome rose to prominence in all facets of life. Constantine and his successors gave their support to the bishop of Rome as the supreme ruler of the church. Of course, it is best for the unity of the Roman Empire that the government and state religion be centralized. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. When the Roman Empire collapsed, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors—Pontifex Maximus.



Many more examples could be given. These four should suffice in demonstrating the origin of the Catholic Church. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church denies the pagan origin of its beliefs and practices. The Catholic Church disguises its pagan beliefs under layers of complicated theology and “church tradition.” Recognizing that many of its beliefs and practices are utterly foreign to Scripture, the Catholic Church is forced to deny the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.



The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church “Christianized” the pagan religions, and “paganized” Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, yes, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the people of the Roman Empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the Roman world for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word.



Second Timothy 4:3–4 declares, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
No, the Catholic church has a history of combating heresy throughout its almost 2,000 year history.
 
No, the Catholic church has a history of combating heresy throughout its almost 2,000 year history.

“Indeed the devil thinks more true thoughts about God in one day than a saint does in a lifetime, and God is not honored by it. The problem with the devil is not his theology, but his desires. Our chief end is to glorify God, the great Object. We do so most fully when we treasure him, desire him, delight in him so supremely that we let goods and kindred go and display his love to the poor and the lost.”​

-J Piper
 

“Indeed the devil thinks more true thoughts about God in one day than a saint does in a lifetime, and God is not honored by it. The problem with the devil is not his theology, but his desires. Our chief end is to glorify God, the great Object. We do so most fully when we treasure him, desire him, delight in him so supremely that we let goods and kindred go and display his love to the poor and the lost.”​

-J Piper

Jesus gave authority to Peter and his successors. We cannot go wrong if we listen to the one Jesus gave the authority.
 
Uh, you are not presenting the evidence that I asked for. Let me expand on what is needed. If there was some other church besides the one that became known as the Catholic church that dominated 1st and 2nd century Christianity, where are the historical documents of that church denouncing Pope Sixtus the first, for example, who lead the Church from 115 AD to 125 AD for example, or Pope Hyginus who led the Church from 136 AD to 140 AD, or Pope Victor I who led the Church from 189 AD to 199 AD? There is a rich set of historical documents, not Church documents, but documents from secular historians, documenting that Church. So by the year 200 AD the Church had already assumed the name "Catholic" this church was well known in the Roman Empire and beyond. But if there was some other Church that was more "real" than the Catholic Church, there must be some documents, equivalent to today's "Got Questions" website, calling out the Catholic Church for being a fake Christianity. It is unimaginable that the "real" church would have remained silent during those years. So please cite the historical evidence from the "real" Christians of that era. Where is the rebuke of Ambrose of Milan, a prominent member of the Catholic Church? Where is the rebuke of Augustine of Hippo for his supposed heresy of supporting the Catholic Church? If history is as you say, and the "real" Christians were not in the Catholic Church, where are the histories describing them?
The thread is about the origin of the rc denomination. You can start another thread with your 'rabbit trail' if you want.
 
Do you mean Jesus gave APOSTOLIC authority Peter's successors?
Yes, apostolic succession. Jesus established the office of Prime Minister of his kingdom and Peter was the first one to hold that office. Like any organization the office doesn't end with the death of the one holding the office it continues with successors.
 
There was no concept of a universal bishop presiding over the church until Constantine’s corruption of the faith. How do we know this? Let’s take a look at the Word of God vs. the word of man.
First Council of Nicaea, (325), the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, meeting in ancient Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey). It was called by the emperor Constantine I, an unbaptized catechumen, who presided over the opening session and took part in the discussions. He hoped a general council of the church would solve the problem created in the Eastern church by Arianism, a heresy first proposed by Arius of Alexandria that affirmed that Christ is not divine but a created being. Pope Sylvester I did not attend the council but was represented by legates. Britannica
 
The thread is about the origin of the rc denomination. You can start another thread with your 'rabbit trail' if you want.
The question of which church represented the Christians in the first century directly addresses the issue of the origin of the Catholic Church, and has been addressed by others in this thread.
 
The question of which church represented the Christians in the first century directly addresses the issue of the origin of the Catholic Church,
Wrong. The universal Church, the Body of Christ, is made up of all born-again believers. The subject of the thread is the origin of the rc denomination, which looks pretty awful IMHO. Still waiting for you to address it's claims.
and has been addressed by others in this thread.
You ignored the op again. God's 'Church' is the Body of Christ, made up of all born-again believers. Again, the origin of the rc denomination is the subject of this thread. Still waiting for you to address it's claims.
I know that really looking at the history of the rc denomination is tough for it's members because it exposes the lies of rc leaders.
 
Wrong. The universal Church, the Body of Christ, is made up of all born-again believers. The subject of the thread is the origin of the rc denomination, which looks pretty awful IMHO. Still waiting for you to address it's claims.

You ignored the op again. God's 'Church' is the Body of Christ, made up of all born-again believers. Again, the origin of the rc denomination is the subject of this thread. Still waiting for you to address it's claims.
I know that really looking at the history of the rc denomination is tough for it's members because it exposes the lies of rc leaders.
Your source that you use are history is not accurate. It is false testimony.
 
You have not proved it false. The case laid out has not been refuted by any member of the rc denomination here.
All you have to do is look at other histories. We don't need to post them but they are available to anyone to look at.
 
First Council of Nicaea, (325), the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, meeting in ancient Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey). It was called by the emperor Constantine I, an unbaptized catechumen, who presided over the opening session and took part in the discussions. He hoped a general council of the church would solve the problem created in the Eastern church by Arianism, a heresy first proposed by Arius of Alexandria that affirmed that Christ is not divine but a created being. Pope Sylvester I did not attend the council but was represented by legates. Britannica
This statement does nothing in trying to prove the so-called universal authority of the bishop of Rome. Only about 300 or so of the 1800 bishops invited to attend the council showed up. Other bishops who could not attend also sent delegates.
 
like these?
"Constantine believed he ruled by the grace of God and as God's representative on Earth any disobedience to him was sacrilege"

"we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff"
(314AD) Letter of Constantine to Ablavius (or Ælafius):

I confess to your Lordship, since I am well aware that you also are a worshipper of the most High God, that I consider it by no means right that contentions and altercations of this kind should be hidden from me, by which, perchance, God may be moved not only against the human race, but also against me myself, to whose care, by His heavenly Decree, He has entrusted the direction of all human affairs, and may in His wrath provide otherwise than heretofore.
 
Sad. Again. You have not proved it false. The case laid out has not been refuted by any member of the rc denomination here.
Your OP is from a very bias source. Proving it wrong would be almost like proving that the earth is a sphere to someone who believes that the earth is flat.
 
No, the poster posted unsupported claims made by a website.
The poster posted the truth and it has a load of support, it can be found in non RC history books. The history is normally written by the winners and the RCc squashed all those who opposed them in past centuries, trying to silence them and their histories. It has failed and their voices prove the revisionist history of the RCC.
 
Back
Top