• Welcome to Christianity Haven, thank you for visiting! If you have not already, we invite you to create an account and join in on the many discussions we have! 

    • Please be aware that when registering you must not register while using a VPN. Any registrations made using a VPN will be rejected.
    • Additionally, registration emails are not being sent out which is an issue that is being worked on. Your registration may go into an approval queue for admin approval. We work to send manual emails to the email on file, so please ensure the email you use is one you can readily access! 

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,382
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
You might find it interesting to examine the Church during the first century, the Christians that were closest to Jesus in time, the way they lived, worshipped and practiced what Jesus taught them in their daily lives.

Then, a few hundred years later (4th century) Constantine showed up and restructured the Church along Roman political and cultural elitist hierarchy structures so that what we have today would likely be unrecognizable as a Christian church by first century Christians and most likely a Christian from today would not recognize the first century Christians a being the Church.

Pre and post Constantine the Church took on a very different form.

FWIW, a piece of Constantine trivia: Constantine himself was never baptized during his years of establishing the Church as the official state religion of Rome and establishing feasts and holy days to fit into Roman culture, It was only on his deathbed that he was baptized shortly before he died.
The claim that Constantine simply "showed up and restructured the Church along Roman political and cultural elitist hierarchy structures" oversimplifies and misrepresents the complex historical development of the early Church. Long before Constantine’s conversion and the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, the Church had already developed a hierarchical structure with bishops, priests, and deacons, rooted in apostolic tradition and practical needs for governance, teaching, and sacramental administration. This structure evolved organically as Christianity spread and faced theological disputes and persecution. Constantine’s role was significant in legalising Christianity and supporting its public presence, but he did not invent the Church’s hierarchy or doctrines; rather, he endorsed and facilitated an existing institution. The core beliefs, liturgical practices, and community life of the Church by the fourth century still reflected continuity with earlier Christian traditions, including those of the first century, even as they adapted to new social and political realities. Moreover, many elements of faith and worship from the first century remain recognisable in today’s Catholic and Orthodox Churches, demonstrating a historical continuity rather than a radical break. Thus, while Constantine’s influence was important, it did not create a wholly unrecognisable or elitist Church disconnected from its origins.

online sources with academic credibility present this summary of Church history from the time of Christ until the end of the fourth century AD.

From the time of Jesus until the end of the fourth century, Church history is marked by the birth and spread of Christianity, beginning with Jesus Christ’s ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection in the early first century. His apostles and early followers spread the faith throughout the Roman Empire despite periods of persecution. The Church developed its organisational structure, with bishops emerging as key leaders, and established core doctrines through councils such as Nicaea in 325 AD, which affirmed the divinity of Christ and produced the Nicene Creed. Christianity transitioned from a persecuted sect to the dominant religion of the Roman Empire, especially after Emperor Constantine’s conversion and the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, which granted religious tolerance. By the end of the fourth century, under Emperor Theodosius I, Christianity became the state religion, shaping the religious, cultural, and political landscape of the Western world.
Bishops and priests appeared as part of the Church structure in the first and early second centuries as Christianity grew and required organised leadership to maintain doctrinal unity and community order. Bishops emerged as overseers of local Christian communities, responsible for teaching, worship, and discipline, often seen as successors to the apostles. Priests (or presbyters) served under bishops, assisting in liturgical functions and pastoral care. This hierarchical structure became more defined by the second century, helping the Church to establish authority and cohesion amid external pressures and internal theological disputes.
The development of the liturgy in the early Church from the time of Jesus until the end of the fourth century was a gradual process shaped by Jewish worship traditions, apostolic practices, and the needs of growing Christian communities. Early Christians initially gathered for communal meals and the breaking of bread, reflecting Jesus’ Last Supper, which evolved into the Eucharist as the central act of Christian worship. Over time, prayers, readings from Scripture, hymns, and rituals such as baptism and the sign of peace were incorporated, creating a structured order of worship. By the fourth century, with Christianity’s legalisation and growing prominence, liturgical practices became more formalised and uniform, influenced by regional customs and the increasing role of bishops and priests in leading worship, laying the foundation for the diverse liturgical traditions seen in later centuries.
The basic elements of the Christian liturgy arose gradually from the first century, deeply rooted in Jewish worship traditions such as the Passover meal, which early Christians adapted into the Eucharist, reflecting Jesus’ Last Supper. Key sources documenting early liturgical practices include the writings of Justin Martyr around 150 AD, who described the structure of Christian worship involving readings, prayers, a homily, and the Eucharist, and the Apostolic Tradition by St. Hippolytus of Rome around 220 AD, which provides detailed instructions on baptism, Eucharist, and other rites. By the third and fourth centuries, these elements—Scripture readings, prayers, hymns, the Creed, baptism, and the Eucharist—were well established and increasingly formalised, influenced by the Church’s growing hierarchy and the need for uniformity across Christian communities. This period laid the foundation for the liturgical forms that would evolve into the Catholic and Orthodox traditions.
By the end of the fourth century, a liturgy containing most or all of the elements present in Catholic and Orthodox worship had begun to take shape, evolving from earlier Christian worship practices. This liturgy included the central celebration of the Eucharist, Scripture readings, prayers, hymns, the Creed, and sacraments such as baptism and confession. The formalisation was influenced by the Church’s growing structure, the role of bishops and priests, and the need for uniformity across the expanding Christian world. Key liturgical texts and rites, such as those from Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, contributed to this development, establishing a pattern that would become the foundation for the later, more fully developed Catholic and Orthodox liturgical traditions.
 

Frankj

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2024
Messages
935
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
None the less, I
The claim that Constantine simply "showed up and restructured the Church along Roman political and cultural elitist hierarchy structures" oversimplifies and misrepresents the complex historical development of the early Church. Long before Constantine’s conversion and the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, the Church had already developed a hierarchical structure with bishops, priests, and deacons, rooted in apostolic tradition and practical needs for governance, teaching, and sacramental administration. This structure evolved organically as Christianity spread and faced theological disputes and persecution. Constantine’s role was significant in legalising Christianity and supporting its public presence, but he did not invent the Church’s hierarchy or doctrines; rather, he endorsed and facilitated an existing institution. The core beliefs, liturgical practices, and community life of the Church by the fourth century still reflected continuity with earlier Christian traditions, including those of the first century, even as they adapted to new social and political realities. Moreover, many elements of faith and worship from the first century remain recognisable in today’s Catholic and Orthodox Churches, demonstrating a historical continuity rather than a radical break. Thus, while Constantine’s influence was important, it did not create a wholly unrecognisable or elitist Church disconnected from its origins.

online sources with academic credibility present this summary of Church history from the time of Christ until the end of the fourth century AD.

From the time of Jesus until the end of the fourth century, Church history is marked by the birth and spread of Christianity, beginning with Jesus Christ’s ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection in the early first century. His apostles and early followers spread the faith throughout the Roman Empire despite periods of persecution. The Church developed its organisational structure, with bishops emerging as key leaders, and established core doctrines through councils such as Nicaea in 325 AD, which affirmed the divinity of Christ and produced the Nicene Creed. Christianity transitioned from a persecuted sect to the dominant religion of the Roman Empire, especially after Emperor Constantine’s conversion and the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, which granted religious tolerance. By the end of the fourth century, under Emperor Theodosius I, Christianity became the state religion, shaping the religious, cultural, and political landscape of the Western world.
Bishops and priests appeared as part of the Church structure in the first and early second centuries as Christianity grew and required organised leadership to maintain doctrinal unity and community order. Bishops emerged as overseers of local Christian communities, responsible for teaching, worship, and discipline, often seen as successors to the apostles. Priests (or presbyters) served under bishops, assisting in liturgical functions and pastoral care. This hierarchical structure became more defined by the second century, helping the Church to establish authority and cohesion amid external pressures and internal theological disputes.
The development of the liturgy in the early Church from the time of Jesus until the end of the fourth century was a gradual process shaped by Jewish worship traditions, apostolic practices, and the needs of growing Christian communities. Early Christians initially gathered for communal meals and the breaking of bread, reflecting Jesus’ Last Supper, which evolved into the Eucharist as the central act of Christian worship. Over time, prayers, readings from Scripture, hymns, and rituals such as baptism and the sign of peace were incorporated, creating a structured order of worship. By the fourth century, with Christianity’s legalisation and growing prominence, liturgical practices became more formalised and uniform, influenced by regional customs and the increasing role of bishops and priests in leading worship, laying the foundation for the diverse liturgical traditions seen in later centuries.
The basic elements of the Christian liturgy arose gradually from the first century, deeply rooted in Jewish worship traditions such as the Passover meal, which early Christians adapted into the Eucharist, reflecting Jesus’ Last Supper. Key sources documenting early liturgical practices include the writings of Justin Martyr around 150 AD, who described the structure of Christian worship involving readings, prayers, a homily, and the Eucharist, and the Apostolic Tradition by St. Hippolytus of Rome around 220 AD, which provides detailed instructions on baptism, Eucharist, and other rites. By the third and fourth centuries, these elements—Scripture readings, prayers, hymns, the Creed, baptism, and the Eucharist—were well established and increasingly formalised, influenced by the Church’s growing hierarchy and the need for uniformity across Christian communities. This period laid the foundation for the liturgical forms that would evolve into the Catholic and Orthodox traditions.
By the end of the fourth century, a liturgy containing most or all of the elements present in Catholic and Orthodox worship had begun to take shape, evolving from earlier Christian worship practices. This liturgy included the central celebration of the Eucharist, Scripture readings, prayers, hymns, the Creed, and sacraments such as baptism and confession. The formalisation was influenced by the Church’s growing structure, the role of bishops and priests, and the need for uniformity across the expanding Christian world. Key liturgical texts and rites, such as those from Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, contributed to this development, establishing a pattern that would become the foundation for the later, more fully developed Catholic and Orthodox liturgical traditions.

None the less, the point is very much that the earliest Christians, those closest to him and his teaching in time, some of whom knew him or heard him teach, were very different in their approach to the practice of Christianity than those coming later that kept adding all sorts of new teachings and structures to the Church which, In my often fallible opinion, has moved the Church from practicing the religion of Jesus, the one he taught, to ever increasingly practicing a religion about Jesus in its place.

Perhaps this is as it should be, it seems to be what is prophesied to happen in the latter days and is needed to fulfill the prophecies of the end times that will precede the return to of Jesus.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,382
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
None the less, the point is very much that the earliest Christians, those closest to him and his teaching in time, some of whom knew him or heard him teach, were very different in their approach to the practice of Christianity
That claim collapses once you actually read the ante‑Nicene Fathers, who show remarkable continuity with what later Christians would recognise as “mainstream” doctrine and practice. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD)—a man who personally knew the apostles—insists on the Eucharist as “the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ” (Smyrn. 7), on a mono‑episcopal hierarchy (Trall. 3), and on the Church’s unity under bishop, presbyters, and deacons (Magnes. 6). Justin Martyr (c. 155 AD) describes Christian worship recognisably: Sunday liturgy, readings, homily, prayers, the kiss of peace, and a Eucharist received only by the baptised because it is no mere symbol but the real participation in Christ’s body and blood (1 Apol. 65–66). Irenaeus (c. 180 AD)—a hearer of Polycarp, who was himself a disciple of John—teaches apostolic succession (Adv. Haer. 3.3.1), baptismal regeneration (3.17.1), and the Eucharist as the true body and blood of Christ (4.18.5). These are not “very different approaches”, but the mature expression of the same faith handed on from the apostles.

Even writers with different emphases still reflect a recognisably catholic Christianity. Tertullian (c. 200 AD) affirms the rule of faith, the Trinity (even coining the Latin term), and baptism as the moment when sins are washed away (De Bapt. 1, 7). The Didache (late first or early second century) presupposes structured liturgy, fasting days, moral discipline, and Eucharistic thanksgiving prayers (chs. 7–10). Clement of Rome (c. 96 AD)—writing within living memory of Christ—defends apostolic authority and the legitimacy of ordained ministry (1 Clem. 42–44). Far from showing a Christianity “very different” from later practice, the earliest sources demonstrate continuity in sacramental life, hierarchical structure, doctrinal content, and communal worship. The burden of proof lies on anyone claiming rupture, because the primary evidence overwhelmingly shows stability rather than divergence.
 

Frankj

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2024
Messages
935
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
That claim collapses once you actually read the ante‑Nicene Fathers, who show remarkable continuity with what later Christians would recognise as “mainstream” doctrine and practice. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD)—a man who personally knew the apostles—insists on the Eucharist as “the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ” (Smyrn. 7), on a mono‑episcopal hierarchy (Trall. 3), and on the Church’s unity under bishop, presbyters, and deacons (Magnes. 6). Justin Martyr (c. 155 AD) describes Christian worship recognisably: Sunday liturgy, readings, homily, prayers, the kiss of peace, and a Eucharist received only by the baptised because it is no mere symbol but the real participation in Christ’s body and blood (1 Apol. 65–66). Irenaeus (c. 180 AD)—a hearer of Polycarp, who was himself a disciple of John—teaches apostolic succession (Adv. Haer. 3.3.1), baptismal regeneration (3.17.1), and the Eucharist as the true body and blood of Christ (4.18.5). These are not “very different approaches”, but the mature expression of the same faith handed on from the apostles.

Even writers with different emphases still reflect a recognisably catholic Christianity. Tertullian (c. 200 AD) affirms the rule of faith, the Trinity (even coining the Latin term), and baptism as the moment when sins are washed away (De Bapt. 1, 7). The Didache (late first or early second century) presupposes structured liturgy, fasting days, moral discipline, and Eucharistic thanksgiving prayers (chs. 7–10). Clement of Rome (c. 96 AD)—writing within living memory of Christ—defends apostolic authority and the legitimacy of ordained ministry (1 Clem. 42–44). Far from showing a Christianity “very different” from later practice, the earliest sources demonstrate continuity in sacramental life, hierarchical structure, doctrinal content, and communal worship. The burden of proof lies on anyone claiming rupture, because the primary evidence overwhelmingly shows stability rather than divergence.
This leads me to consider, what structure and liturgical practices did Jesus teach?

I look at the Church today and see many people placing its ceremony and decorum at the top of the list and the teachings of Jesus himself of much less importance in how they practice Christianity.

Again, if you don't first, foremost and above all else practice the religion taught above all else then you are putting something ahead of God and the Church becomes a God in itself. It only carries a teaching about Jesus to give it legitimacy.

This is what I call creating Churchians in place of Christians.

Consider this for a while, step out of the box, so to speak, and look and see what the true state of the Church and those calling themselves Christians is today.

We are warned by Jesus himself that in the end there will be a great deception with many false prophets and false Christs appearing, the only thing we have to protect us from this is the Bible and strict adherence to its record of what Jesus taught us, IMO if Jesus didn't teach it, through both is words and his actions, we should be very wary of it as a teaching today no matter what Church or denomination we may belong to.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,382
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
This leads me to consider, what structure and liturgical practices did Jesus teach?
Not the ones visible in any local Baptist or Evangelical church. He taught the practices that God gave to Israel, modified to function under the New Covenant — which is, after all, the very same covenant to which the Old Testament bore witness and which was brought into fulfilment with Christ.
I look at the Church today and see many people placing its ceremony and decorum at the top of the list and the teachings of Jesus himself of much less importance in how they practice Christianity.

Again, if you don't first, foremost and above all else practice the religion taught above all else then you are putting something ahead of God and the Church becomes a God in itself. It only carries a teaching about Jesus to give it legitimacy.
This is a fair observation, and it points to a genuine tension. However, the conclusion you draw cuts both ways. If prioritising ceremony over Christ's teachings is a distortion, then so is discarding the structure He actually established. To place one's own preferred, simplified form of worship above the historically transmitted practice of the faith is equally to put something ahead of God. A church stripped of its apostolic inheritance does not thereby become more Christ-centred — it simply substitutes one set of human choices for another, while using the name of Jesus to lend it legitimacy.

The deeper issue is this: you don't practise the religion Christ taught to the apostles — the faith they handed on to bishops, who passed it faithfully to their successors across the centuries, developing only those disciplines necessary to confront heresy, navigate modernity, and guard against whatever else would have corrupted the Church of Jesus Christ had it gone unanswered.

The remainder of your argument, I'm afraid, rests on poor reasoning — reasoning shaped not by malice, but by an unfamiliarity with what the historical record actually demonstrates.
 
Last edited:

Frankj

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2024
Messages
935
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Not the ones visible in any local Baptist or Evangelical church. He taught the practices that God gave to Israel, modified to function under the New Covenant — which is, after all, the very same covenant to which the Old Testament bore witness and which was brought into fulfilment with Christ.

This is a fair observation, and it points to a genuine tension. However, the conclusion you draw cuts both ways. If prioritising ceremony over Christ's teachings is a distortion, then so is discarding the structure He actually established. To place one's own preferred, simplified form of worship above the historically transmitted practice of the faith is equally to put something ahead of God. A church stripped of its apostolic inheritance does not thereby become more Christ-centred — it simply substitutes one set of human choices for another, while using the name of Jesus to lend it legitimacy.

The deeper issue is this: you don't practise the religion Christ taught to the apostles — the faith they handed on to bishops, who passed it faithfully to their successors across the centuries, developing only those disciplines necessary to confront heresy, navigate modernity, and guard against whatever else would have corrupted the Church of Jesus Christ had it gone unanswered.

The remainder of your argument, I'm afraid, rests on poor reasoning — reasoning shaped not by malice, but by an unfamiliarity with what the historical record actually demonstrates.
Some of the major problems I have with the Catholic church today are such things as praying to saints and their statues, since you refer to the historical record when and why did this practice enter the Catholic church? And what teaching of Jesus justifies it?

Keep in mind that I am not judging any individual Catholic for his belief or lack of it, I have known some extremely strong Christians who are Catholic, but calling into question for examination the power structure and practices within the Church itself and those in positions of power within it in today's world.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,382
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Some of the major problems I have with the Catholic church today are such things as praying to saints and their statues, since you refer to the historical record when and why did this practice enter the Catholic church? And what teaching of Jesus justifies it?

Keep in mind that I am not judging any individual Catholic for his belief or lack of it, I have known some extremely strong Christians who are Catholic, but calling into question for examination the power structure and practices within the Church itself and those in positions of power within it in today's world.
You off topic I am sure, by now.
 
Top Bottom