Is the Roman Catholic Church the "mother church?"

I believe the Church in Acts is the "mother" Church, and I don't recall seeing the word catholic anywhere in Acts.

I bet EWTN will feature Sen. Brownback on The Journey Home

 

Re: mother church

Here is a repost of my last post

Marcia,

I cannot speak for others but simply for myself. As I have studied Baptist History and church history he is correct. There is not direct lineage between John the Baptizer (who was not part of the church) the church of Jerusalem of which the disciples (apostles) were part of the leadership and the Baptist churches of today. We have a succession of faith not a succession of churches that has been semi charted through the years. We understand that God has never left himself without a witness.

The RCC of today evolved from within the pure body of Christ of 1st Century Christendom. And when the corrupt part of the church proved convincingly that they were in charge true believers exited to Anabaptist movements of varying beliefs but who for the most part kept the basic tenants of the faith.

I know this definition will not line up with everyone but it is a general position and not an exact one.

 

I wouldn't call it that, but I completely understand why Catholics would.

I would describe the RCC as the western branch that resulted from the mutual East-West schism of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which finalized in 1054. I would also describe the RCC as the branch from which the Protestant Reformation schismed from. I consider the Baptists to be indirectly part of the Reformation through a reformation of the Anglican Church in the English puritan movement in the 16th & 17th centuries which resulted in many puritan separatist groups, including the early baptists.

Of course Landmark baptists would disagree with that view.

 

I believe you are referring to Catholosism becoming the national religion in Rome. However, Paul took the Gospel on the road and had churches in many other places. Peter is given a lot of credit for the Church in Rome and Catholosism. Do we give them credit for the entire prodestant belief?

 

I say NO.

I believe the church at Jerusalem was established before the church at Rome. See the book of Acts.

 

The only church that recognizes catholicism as the mother is the same one that has Satan as its father.

 

It would be startling if we saw that. I haven't seen any Baptist or non-Baptist agree with that statement in any of the two threads you started on this topic.

 

As was mentioned in the other thread, I think, Marcia, that you are confusing a reference to the Eastern Orthodox or Eastern Catholic church with the generic adjective "orthodox". Indeed, the Eastern Orthodox split from the RCC.

 

RE: church

Marcia,

What I am saying is that the system called the 'Church' (Brandon I hope you are reading this) that Jesus started and whom the apostles provided early leadership for was ultimately led by men who were deceived by Satan into accepting paganism, union with state government, the presenting of traditions as scripture, and ultimately making man the speaker for God. From within the system that housed the pure first century church ultimately emerged the corrupt Catholic Church. The church of Jerusalem did not become Catholic, or western or eastern orthodox the system that housed these schools of pagan thought became corrupt. Hence Annabaptists pulled away from the system and maintained their individual autonomy and succession of faith rather than be a part of a corrupt system led by Rome which became the RCC.

For those who offer a different perspective lets talk.

thjplgvp

 

Not at all. There were other churches before the RCC, many of which are mentioned in the New Testament (Ephesus, Phillipi, Laodecia, etc.). There were also gnostic and coptic Christians in the early years of the church that were in no way related to the RCC. That doesn't negate that the Eastern Orthodox and RCC split from one another (How's that, RSR?), and the Protestant Reformation was also a schism from Rome. Of course Anglicanism (Church of England, Episcopalian, Anglican, Methodist, Wesleyan, etc.) was the result of King Henry VIII not being able to get an annulment of his marriage from the Pope, so the RCC is their mother church as well.

 

Re: No one will say

Marcia asked, “This makes it sound like the RC church is the original church. No one will say whether they think that is true.”


Thjplgvp wrote, “Marcia, What I am saying is that the system called the 'Church' (Brandon I hope you are reading this) that Jesus started and whom the apostles provided early leadership for was ultimately led by men who were deceived by Satan into accepting paganism, union with state government, the presenting of traditions as scripture, and ultimately making man the speaker for God. From within the system that housed the pure first century church ultimately emerged the corrupt Catholic Church. The church of Jerusalem did not become Catholic, or western or eastern orthodox the system that housed these schools of pagan thought became corrupt. Hence Anabaptists pulled away from the system and maintained their individual autonomy and succession of faith rather than be a part of a corrupt system led by Rome which became the RCC.”

I am beginning to think I am a voice crying in the wilderness:laugh: :laugh:

 

I could be wrong here, but couldn't one trace the RCC back to Constantine making his vision of Christianity the state religion of Rome in the 4th Century A.D.?

 

MP, absolutely but he simply used the system that was in place.

It was Constantine who declared he was Ponifex Maximus (High Priest) within the system that started with Christ. The wedding of state and Ekklesiatic authority under one head (him) also he was trying to reunite the western and eastern empires under one state and one religion (east and west had excommunicated each other).

My original point was that the very system that protected the body of Christ in Acts 15 was totally corrupt by by 325 therefore Anabaptists knew they could not save the sytem from corruption and split.

 

Excellent comment!