Why Be Catholic....

[simonthezealot]

The wink wasnt because I was 'fibbing' or 'joking'...I find it down right comical when people try to claim the Catholic Church was established with Constantine...that is why I love using writings of the ECF's pre-Constantine...like St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Justin Martyr and St. Irenaeus of Lyons...

Clement the man who promoted a plurality of elders as opposed to a monarcical authority?

Ireneaus view on; primacy, salvation, veneration of images, sacrificial nature and real presence of the Eucharist, as well as the sufficiency and perspicuity of scripture... are all at very least variant from what your church teaches, and in some areas outright opposition.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The wink wasnt because I was 'fibbing' or 'joking'...I find it down right comical when people try to claim the Catholic Church was established with Constantine...that is why I love using writings of the ECF's pre-Constantine...like St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Justin Martyr and St. Irenaeus of Lyons...

I find it rather factual myself

http://www.christianforums.com/t7330134-25/#post50139169
The RCC born in 313 AD?

.......But the simple, humble Christian church was soon to undergo radical change. In 313 AD the Emperor of Rome, Constantine, declared himself to be a Christian. Although Constantine originally called for religious freedom, power corrupted that ideal, and soon Christianity became an absolute spiritual monarchy, with the pope as spiritual leader.

The Roman Catholic Church was born. Church organization and government became hierarchical and complex with strict laws and creedal statements which church members were required to believe..................

 

[simonthezealot]

snip>
For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:3:2 (A.D. 180).

Note some key words here, this is what we believ as well and is recorded in scripture..It doesn't mean they are the only authority, furthermore it says consider them authority as only as long as they follow what Paul and the others taught.

inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved

 

[sunlover1]

Then intrepret this: Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven all their sins and all the blasphmies they utter. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’."

I've got this:

Truly (IOW truly)

I tell you (IOW, I tell you)

people will be forgiven their sins and all the blasphemies they utter. (IOW...people will be forgiven all their sins and all the blasphmies they utter)

But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin.
(IOW,..But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. )

He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’
(IOW, He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’)


Easy, no harder to "read" it, than it would be to "hear" it.
just have to break it down.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Hey... doesn't this contradict what Paul and Peter said about not having dominion or lording it over the faith?

And say I, Honour thou God indeed, as the Author and Lord of all things, but the bishop as the high-priest, who bears the image of God—of God, inasmuch as he is a ruler, and of Christ, in his capacity of a priest. (Ignatius, to the Smyrnaeans, IX)

In other words, 'honour God indeed... but honour the bishop as he is a ruler.'

Hey, why does Ignatius say this:

It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid. (Ignatius, to the Smyrnaeans, VIII)

Really? Sunday community meals done outside of the RCC church are invalid?

 

[simonthezealot]

"Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him." Clement of Rome, The First Epistle of Clement, 5 (c. A.D. 96).

Can't stand this kind of quote mining, you lose all credibility when you do this.

What's your point he speaks likewise of Paul?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Can't stand this kind of quote mining, you lose all credibility when you do this.

What's your point he speaks likewise of Paul?

Fallacy of quoting out of context - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The practice of quoting out of context, sometimes referred to as "contextomy" or "quote mining", is a logical fallacy and a type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning.[1]
Arguments based on this fallacy typically take two forms.

As a straw man argument, which is frequently found in politics, it involves quoting an opponent out of context in order to misrepresent their position (typically to make it seem more simplistic or extreme) in order to make it easier to refute. As an appeal to authority, it involves quoting an authority on the subject out of context, in order to misrepresent that authority as supporting some position.[2]

 

[simonthezealot]

Then intrepret this: Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven all their sins and all the blasphmies they utter. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’."

Whats to interpret?

You know who the Holy Spirit is?
God

You know what blasphemy is?
Put simply calling the clear irrefutable work of the Holy Spirit as evil/demonic.

 

[simonthezealot]

Whats to interpret?

You know who the Holy Spirit is?
God

You know what blasphemy is?
Put simply calling the clear irrefutable work of the Holy Spirit as evil/demonic.

Want to take a shot now at interpreting the one i posted and then telling us we need an authority to interpret?

If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Whats to interpret?

You know who the Holy Spirit is?
God

You know what blasphemy is?
Put simply calling the clear irrefutable work of the Holy Spirit as evil/demonic.

John 10:33 Answered Him, the Judeans saying, "About a good work not we are stoning Thee but about blasphemy,
and that Thou, being a man, are making thyself a God".
[Romans 2:23/Reve 16:11,21]

Reve 16:11 And they blaspheme the God of the heaven out of the miseries of them, and out of the sores of them, and not they reform out of the works of them

Kindgdom Bible Studies Savior of the World Series Part 14

What is the sin against the Holy Spirit? In the third chapter of Mark, we have the parallel passage to the text we just read in Matthew, the same record of these men coming around Jesus when they saw Him perform His mighty miracle for the poor man who could neither see nor speak. In order to keep the people from believing Jesus, they said the miracle was performed by the power of Satan. Notice the words of Jesus in verses 28-30: "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith so ever they shall blaspheme. But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost has never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: BECAUSE THEY SAID, HE HAS AN UNCLEAN SPIRIT."

Ah - now there's a clue - the Pharisees' opposition to Jesus was not a spur of the moment, hotheaded fit of pique. These men knew what they were doing. Their schemes against Jesus were deliberate, calculated. A leading Pharisee, Nicodemus, once confided to Jesus, "Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him" (Jn. 3:2).

 

[simonthezealot]

To put it bluntly, I don't trust any source you cite without looking at it in full context, and I don't have time to read through a small novel between you and Mr. Polo and this time.

Our debate has been the only short one there is, we had only 4 rounds and a short word count (1000word maximum.)
I think your thinking of Anthanasius and his 5000 word posts.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Our debate has been the only short one there is, we had only 4 rounds and a short word count (1000word maximum.)
I think your thinking of Anthanasius and his 5000 word posts.

Are you talking about this member

http://www.christianforums.com/t7429494-78/#post53864852
Worship or venerate,are they the same?

quote "Athanasias"

"Look folks I am not here to preach a sermon. I am here becasue I just came out of the Catholic church and I have gone to school for a year at a Eo school and both taught the worship of Icons and statues and the priest and teachers even used the word worship to describe what we were doing. when I was Catholic I held that in for along time but now I knwo that veneration is worship!"

 

[simonthezealot]

Are you talking about this member

http://www.christianforums.com/t7429494-78/#post53864852
Worship or venerate,are they the same?

quote "Athanasias"

"Look folks I am not here to preach a sermon. I am here becasue I just came out of the Catholic church and I have gone to school for a year at a Eo school and both taught the worship of Icons and statues and the priest and teachers even used the word worship to describe what we were doing. when I was Catholic I held that in for along time but now I knwo that veneration is worship!"

Yep one in the same...I see he switched back again to the RCC.

 

[MikhaelDavid]

Actually that is Historic Presbyterianism and yes we keep our plurality of elders both at the local level and at the denomination level. A first among equals is still considered the same at the local level for us Presbyterians that hold to a three office church (Teaching Elder "Bishop", Ruling Elders "Governors or priests in the lowest form" and Deacons) and there is a moderator or president of a presbytery that is elected at every presbytery or synod and he acts as first among equals for the certain session..

You can find this in the Westminster Standards - Form of Church Government 1643 and you will find it in Historic Presbyterian Works such as Christ King of the Church by James Portous from the 1800s.

Michael

The transition from bishop - deacon to bishop - priest - deacon is indeed present in the ECFs. However, I wouldn't call that Presbyterianism. A first among equals amongst all the bishops isn't anywhere close to Presbyterianism, if I remember correctly. They keep their "plurality of elders" at the church level, not at the denomination level. Eastern Orthodoxy would probably be a better denomination for what you are trying to describe.



This is the same answer I hear from a lot of Protestants about the validity of Councils. They are only authoritative when they agree iwth scriptures. Where does the authority of a Council begin and end? For many (including you), it seems that the authority begins when it agrees with your beliefs, and ends when it disagrees. "Only when they agree with Scriptures" basically means "only when they agree with my interpretation of the Scriptures." Unless you subscribe to the idea that more than doctrine-producing interpretation of the Bible is valid, you kind of have to take that stance.

 

[Jig]

How many Church's did Christ institute?

Christ established a catholic church, He did not institute the Catholic Church.

 

[Jig]

No, it's you examining two or more different verses in an attempt to gain a better understanding of what the Bible is saying. It's impossible for Scripture to interpret Scripture since the Bible is a bunch of words, and words are not creatures capable of understanding or interpreting.

Interesting. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a book which you believe contains the authoritative summary of Catholic belief regarding the Church creeds, sacraments, commandments, and prayers - is also just a bunch of words not capable of understanding or interpreting.

You have failed to see my point. Roman Catholic teachings must also be interpreted. By using this teaching you have removed yourself one step further from the Scriptures than I.

Well considering Tradition and the beliefs of Christians were around before the New Testament, I'm not sure that's valid. Christianity had well-established beliefs before the canon was solidified, and a lot of those seem to have disappeared in Protestant denominations because they felt like getting rid of them, as it didn't line up with their idea of what constitutes the clear teaching of the Bible.

Really. I didn't know that the belief of priest celibacy, Transubstantiation, the Rosary, Purgatory, the Papacy, veneration of dead saints, indulgences, the Immaculate Conception, etc. were before the NT.

 

[Isaiah 53]

I've got this:

Truly (IOW truly)

I tell you (IOW, I tell you)

people will be forgiven their sins and all the blasphemies they utter. (IOW...people will be forgiven all their sins and all the blasphmies they utter)

But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin.
(IOW,..But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. )

He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’
(IOW, He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’)


Easy, no harder to "read" it, than it would be to "hear" it.
just have to break it down.

Finally! This is what this thread is about...not the ECF's, not the Primacy of Peter or the Catholic Church. My main question is dealing with authority. Here is a controversial passage of Scripture (controversial only because it is highly debated) and one intrepretation. Where, Sunlover, do you draw your conclusions?

I am sure there are others here that would disagree with this intrepretation and want display their understanding...I have seen everything from the Blasphemy is not accepting Christ while alive to homosexuality...who is right? On whose authority do you draw your conclusions?

 

[Isaiah 53]

Interesting. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a book which you believe contains the authoritative summary of Catholic belief regarding the Church creeds, sacraments, commandments, and prayers - is also just a bunch of words not capable of understanding or interpreting.

You have failed to see my point. Roman Catholic teachings must also be interpreted. By using this teaching you have removed yourself one step further from the Scriptures than I.

Its called the Magisterium...the teaching authority of the Church...

 

[Isaiah 53]

Christ established a catholic church, He did not institute the Catholic Church.

Where is that Church today?

 

[Isaiah 53]

Note some key words here, this is what we believ as well and is recorded in scripture..It doesn't mean they are the only authority, furthermore it says consider them authority as only as long as they follow what Paul and the others taught.

inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved

One last "off thread" response by me...you seem to repeatedly say the ECF's do not back the teachings of the Catholic Church, yet you site no examples...quote mine till your hearts content...I would love to discuss this in a different thread...

Here you defend the Catholic Church's position on Holy Tradition..I never said they didnt believe in Scipture (although the NT did not exist at this time)...and yes they must follow the teachings (Traditions) of the Apostles...which is what the ECF's write about then and what the Catholic Magisterium writes and follows today...through APOLOSTOLIC TRADITIONS.