If something WAS, and has not changed, is it STILL?
RELIGIOUSLY - If something can be shown to be 1 thing, in the past, and there isn't evidence that it has changed... isn't it still that same thing it was in the past?
Confusing.. I know. Let me get to the point.
IF the Catholic church can be shown to be Christian in the past. And it has not changed its core doctrines, doesn't that mean it still IS Christian?
OR
Can it stop being Christian, even if it use to be and has not changed its core doctrines?
The only way I think something can be 1 thing and stop being that thing it was, is if:
A) it has changed - in which case it is up to the person proposing this, to show WHEN exactly it changed
OR
B) The Definitions conveniently changed, making what was previously 1 thing no longer that thing. As was the case with the Planet Pluto, NOW being called a "Rocky body" or "Proto-Planet"
2009-10-12T09:46:43Z
I assume that those who say the Catholic church is not Christian, are using Reasons A or B to support that idea. So either it changed at some point OR they have conveniently changed the definition.
PERSONALLY, I think history supports the latter, particularly around the 1600s and mostly in the 19th-20th century. At some point, non-Catholics changed the definition and used to NEW definition to revise history and claim the Catholic church was NEVER Christian to begin with. But is that historically accurate?
I'd like to see the evidence which supports it.
imacatholic22009-10-12T11:30:27Z
Favorite Answer
Your question is confusing but the answer is probably. But in the case of the Catholic Church unnecessary.
The Catholic Church was, is, and always shall be Christian.
Most non-Catholic Christian denominations accept Catholics as Christians. A very few do not.
The World Council of Churches which brings together more than 340 churches, denominations and church fellowships in over 100 countries and territories throughout the world, representing some 550 million Christians accepts the 1.1 billion Catholics as Christians. http://wcc-coe.org/wcc/who/faq-e.html#07
A dictionary would say that a Christian is someone professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
Catholics would fit this definition.
In the Nicene creed, from 325 C.E., Catholics profess:
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father.
Through Him all things were made.
For us and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures: He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.
We accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. We are baptized as Jesus commanded in Matthew 28:19, "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
We truly are spiritually "born again," we just don't usually use those words.
For a complete description of what Catholics believe, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/index.shtml
It wasn’t Protestants that changed. It was the Doctrine of the Catholic Church which was changed. That makes it a new church--it joined with Protestantism. With a new doctrine it became liberal, or a/k/a ecumenical christianity. No longer the One Holy Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ of Nazareth Outside of Which There is No Salvation.
The proof of who changed is held in the Encyclicals of 260 popes, a few below. The Catholic Church cannot change. What changed was the Vatican 2 Church, i.e., those members who departed but kept the 'catholic' term, but who gradually came to believe a new doctrine, “all are saved,” false ecumenism. No, it is not “STILL” even though those same members once “WERE.” The word for those who deny Christ’s Salvific message is "apostate." That includes up to and including the "highest chair."
Denial of just one de fide Doctrine grants one a ticket to heresy. Heresy grants the anathema of the holy Apostles, Ss. Peter and Paul.
Proof of the change? Denial of QUO PRIMUM.
traditionalMASS.org gerrymatatics.org, internationalbiblicalfoundations.org Hutton Gibson.org William F. Strojie,. Last Days of the Catholic Church. 1976 The Reign Of Antichrist, Rev. R. Gerald Culleton The Apocalypse of the Mass, Rev. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L. 1999 Discourses on the Latter Days, Fr. Henry Coleridge, S.J. 1883 sedevacantist.org papal documents
POPES who supply the unchangeability of the Church. Pius XII--41 Encyclicals Pius XI---31 Encyclicals Benedict XV--12 Encyclicals St. Pius X--17 Encyclicals Leo XIII--83 Encyclicals Ven. Pius IX--40 Encyclicals Gregory XVI--10 Encyclicals Pius VIII, 1829--1830 Traditi umilitati-- Leo XII Sept. 28, 1823 - Feb. 10, 1829 1. Charitate Christi December 25, 1825 2. Quod Hoc Ineunte May 24, 1824 3. Ubi Primum May 5, 1824 Pius VII Mar. 14, 1800 - Aug. 20, 1823 1. Diu Satis May 15, 1800 2. Post Tam Diuturnas 29th April, 1814 Pius VI, 1775--1799 1. Charitas April 13, 1791 2. Inscrutabile December 25, 1775 Clement XIV, 1769--1774 1. C+m Summi December 12, 1769 2. Decet Quam Maxime September 21, 1769 3. Inscrutabili Divinae Sapientiae December 12, 1769 4. Salutis Nostrae April 30, 1774 Clement XIII 1758--1769 1. A Quo Die September 13, 1758 2. Appetente Sacro December 20, 1759 3. Christianae Reipublicae November 25, 1766 4. C+m Primum September 17, 1759 5. In Dominico Agro June 14, 1761 6. Summa Quae January 6, 1768 Benedict XIV Aug. 17, 1740 - May 3, 1758 1. A Quo Primum June 14, 1751 2. Allatae Sunt July 26, 1755 3. Apostolica Constitutio June 26, 1749, 4. C+m Religiosi June 26, 1754 5. Ex Quo March 1, 1756 6. Magnae Nobis June 29, 1748 7. Nimiam Licentiam May 18, 1743 8. Peregrinantes May 5, 1749 9. Quanta Cura June 30, 1741 10. Quod Provinciale August 1, 1754 11. Ubi Primum December 3, 1740 [latin only] 12. Vix Pervenit November 1, 1745 Clement XI, 1700--1721* Unigenitus,1713 Sec. 2 Bl. Innocent XI, 1676-1689 * Coelestis Pastor, 1687 [Apostolic Constitution] * Sollicitudo pastoralis 1679 [Motu Proprio] Sixtus VTriumphantis Hierusalem 1588 St. Pius V, 1566-1572* Quo Primum, 1570 [Apos.Const.] .Consueverunt Romani September 17, 1569 Paul IV, * C+m ex Apostolatus Officio Paul III, 1534--1549 Sublimus Dei Leo X , 1513--1521* Exsurge Domine June 15, 1520] Martin V, * Ad Evitanda Scandala 1418 Benedict XII, 1334--1342 * Benedictus Deus 1336 Clement V, June 5, 1305 - Apr. 20, 1314 * Exivi De Paradiso May 6, 1312 Boniface VIII, 1294--1303 * Unam Sanctam, 1302 Gregory X, 1271--1276, Protection Of The Jews, 1272 Innocent IV, June 25, 1243 - Dec. 7, 1254 * Quae Honorem Conditoris Omnium,1247 Nicholas III, Exiit Qui Seminat August 14, 1279 Gregory IX, 1227--1241* Mira Circa Nos, 1228 Honorious III, Aug. 31, 1216 - Mar 18, 1227
if something was, and never changed than it is still unless the definition has changed, but then only the description of the thing has changed. the thing itself is as you stated in your question not changed.
what would be your answer if you asked : if a definition once was , and has not changed, then can a thing that once satisfied that definition, fails to satisfy that definition later ?
of course ... if the thing has changed.
clearly a definition is "something". the way you ask the question forces your answer.
RELIGIOUSLY - If something can be shown to be 1 thing, in the past, and there isn't evidence that it has changed... isn't it still that same thing it was in the past?
Confusing.. I know. Let me get to the point.
Religiously you are confusing. What you said is a fact. It is the same thing as it was.
It changes not basically but apparently. a dreamer apparently changes himself in his dream but remains basically same as a waker!
Others are confusing with contradicting doctrines.