The Papacy, How did it really come about?

[Catholic Christian]

Yeah, but it was dismissed and we all know it was the RCC fathers who chose all the books of the Bible, right? I wonder why they didn't leave that one in there?

Because the Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church into all truth, and the Holy Spirit would not allow the Church to make that error.

I thought you knew that?

 

[Catholic Christian]

...the RCC...

There is no such thing as the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Rite is just one of many rites in the community of churches that make up the Catholic Church. "Roman Catholicism" only exists in the minds of anti-Catholics and pathetic tract writers pretending to be historians.

The Church came into being when Jesus promised, "I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18), and only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant sects were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The list of popes can be traced back to Peter himself, the first pope. Here is the list:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm

Jesus’ Church is called catholic ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations" (Matt. 28:19–20). For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28).
http://www.catholic.com/library/Pillar.asp

 

[fated]

Yeah, but it was dismissed and we all know it was the RCC fathers who chose all the books of the Bible, right? I wonder why they didn't leave that one in there?

Actually each Apostolic Rite has every right to discern its own Bible, and they do, and they are not all the same.

St. Ignatius was never removed from history or Church Tradition. For some reason, it seems prudent for many Protestants to simply ignore this and other documents like it. Of note, the Orthodox do accept document such as this, though many people don't look far enough into their Church unity philosophy.

 

[Catholic Christian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpcVpg8qctQ&feature=related

 

[Technocrat2010]

Yeah, but it was dismissed and we all know it was the RCC fathers who chose all the books of the Bible, right? I wonder why they didn't leave that one in there?

Actually each of the Patriarchates were free to choose the books of the Bible as long as, when read in the proper way (i.e. based on the oral traditions behind the said book), they didn't conflict with the doctrines of the Church. For instance, in the early Constantinople patriarchate's liturgical canon, the deuterocanon was not included (hence St. Jerome's objection to them being added into the canon). However, they considered them to be just as inspired as the rest of scripture (also validated by St. Jerome). Just because something is not in the canon does not guarantee that it is not inspired. For example, in some of the Eastern Catholic and even some of the older Eastern Orthodox canons you will not find the book of Revelation. It's not because they didn't consider it inspired, but because they didn't consider it canonical, or necessary for liturgical purposes - which was, essentially, the purpose of the Bible. The Bible was not meant to be a stand-alone pillar, but a very important supplement to the liturgies of the real source of the faith - the Church, whose source is Christ.

 

[Catholic Christian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC_Ezf23hkM

 

[Ormly]

Actually each of the Patriarchates were free to choose the books of the Bible as long as, when read in the proper way (i.e. based on the oral traditions behind the said book), they didn't conflict with the doctrines of the Church. For instance, in the early Constantinople patriarchate's liturgical canon, the deuterocanon was not included (hence St. Jerome's objection to them being added into the canon). However, they considered them to be just as inspired as the rest of scripture (also validated by St. Jerome). Just because something is not in the canon does not guarantee that it is not inspired. For example, in some of the Eastern Catholic and even some of the older Eastern Orthodox canons you will not find the book of Revelation. It's not because they didn't consider it inspired, but because they didn't consider it canonical, or necessary for liturgical purposes - which was, essentially, the purpose of the Bible. The Bible was not meant to be a stand-alone pillar, but a very important supplement to the liturgies of the real source of the faith - the Church, whose source is Christ.

The 27 we recognize were already in use years before any council voted on them.

 

[Technocrat2010]

The 27 we recognize were already in use years before any council voted on them.

So were other apocryphal gospels and NT letters. Your point?

 

[fated]

So were other apocryphal gospels and NT letters. Your point?

Some Roman Catholics don't know that many Orthodox/Eastern Rite Catholic Churches have Cannons that are different from ours.

 

[Technocrat2010]

Some Roman Catholics don't know that many Orthodox/Eastern Rite Catholic Churches have Cannons that are different from ours.

Indeed. I always get a kick out of telling some of my more ignorant Catholic friends that some of the Eastern Catholic Rite Bibles don't have the book of Revelation... and watching their expression of shock.

 

[Ormly]

So were other apocryphal gospels and NT letters. Your point?

The early church fathers knew which ones to throw out.

 

[Catholic Christian]

The early church fathers knew which ones to throw out.

They did indeed. So why did Herr Weinermeister think he could throw out more centuries later?

 

[Ormly]

They did indeed. So why did Herr Weinermeister think he could throw out more centuries later?

Who is he and what did he throw out?

 

[Catholic Christian]

Who is he and what did he throw out?

1) Luther
2) about 6 Old Testament books

 

[Ormly]

1) Luther
2) about 6 Old Testament books

Ok. Now please name the books and please give the reason why.

Thanks

 

[Technocrat2010]

The early church fathers knew which ones to throw out.

If that is so, why did Martin Luther throw out the deuterocanonicals when the ECF's agreed on their divine inspiration?

Also, how did the ECF's know which ones to throw out and which ones to keep?

 

[Ormly]

If that is so, why did Martin Luther throw out the deuterocanonicals when the ECF's agreed on their divine inspiration?

Also, how did the ECF's know which ones to throw out and which ones to keep?

Who sez I agree with Luther? Is Luther now the main focus in this?

 

[Technocrat2010]

Who sez I agree with Luther? Is Luther now the main focus in this?

I never said you agreed with Luther. I'm asking you - why did Luther take them out? Why did virtually the rest of the Protestant world follow suit?

Also, how did the ECF's know which ones to keep and which to take out?

 

[Ormly]

I never said you agreed with Luther. I'm asking you - why did Luther take them out? Why did virtually the rest of the Protestant world follow suit?

Also, how did the ECF's know which ones to keep and which to take out?

I have my ideas but it all has to thing to do with the my earlier comment. Give it up. I stated the 27 as we know were excepted long before the RCC came into town.

 

[Technocrat2010]

I have my ideas but it all has to thing to do with the my earlier comment. Give it up. I stated the 27 as we know were excepted long before the RCC came into town.

Since the Papacy started with Christ and Peter, it's not a true statement. Also considering the 27 books were in circulation with other Gnostic and apocrpyhal texts, it doesn't mean people could automatically choose them from the rest of the texts.

Give up? No.

Please explain how the ECF's knew which books to keep and which to take out.

Also, please share with us your ideas, if you'd like, as to why Martin Luther threw out the deuterocanonicals.