You would know them had you studied them.
How much clearer can justin martyr be?
"the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word .. IS the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh" First apology, 66
How much clearer can ignatius be to the smyrneans saying the eucharist is only valid if performed by a bishop or appointee?
Start there. Such references are everywhere in the early fathers.
And until you have studied early fathers AND the catholic church, please stop commenting on the extent to which the catholic church follows the early church. You clearly know nothing about it, except the anticatholic mythbook
I would also urge you to consider why it is that ALL the references to the eucharist refer to body, blood , flesh - Including apostle Paul . NONE say that the eucharist is just a symbol. Nor was that what the early church believed, and it requires exegetical cartwheels to pretend that the eucharist is other than our Lord intended us to accept it is body, blood , flesh.
Also study the reality of how faith was passed down, paradosis, tradition. The early church was certainly NOT sola scriptura - faith was passed by true meaning of tradition - "stay true to the traditions we taught you by word of mouth" Because that was the means of handing on faith. ( and as Paul says, and did, by letter)
It is fascinating that the original church now catholic church uses the literal translations of scripture in almost all cases and always has : eg real body and blood in the eucharist, Peter IS the rock, the woman of revelations 12 is indeed Mary etc etc....
And the so called sola scriptura adherents are those that twist scripture in knots trying to avoid all the obvious meanings! And to a large extent the sola scriptura adherents ignore scripture completely, just cherry picking a verse here and there to ignore all other references to a subject which disagree with them
But then scripture is not, nor does it purport to be a manual of Christian practice - nor does it profess to be the sole or prime truth. Indeed it says it is not ! it says "the pillar of truth is the church" in order to recognise the authority Christ gave to "bind and loose" and the fact that the physical church of apostolic succession was the mechanism and vehicle of truth Christ chose to hand on the faith.
As someone who started in protestant then evangelical, before studing fathers and arriving at Rome, I can say from experience that the catholic church is the most scriptural of all. Indeed..the mass liturgy and worship is wall to wall scripture.
How much clearer can justin martyr be?
"the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word .. IS the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh" First apology, 66
How much clearer can ignatius be to the smyrneans saying the eucharist is only valid if performed by a bishop or appointee?
Start there. Such references are everywhere in the early fathers.
And until you have studied early fathers AND the catholic church, please stop commenting on the extent to which the catholic church follows the early church. You clearly know nothing about it, except the anticatholic mythbook
I would also urge you to consider why it is that ALL the references to the eucharist refer to body, blood , flesh - Including apostle Paul . NONE say that the eucharist is just a symbol. Nor was that what the early church believed, and it requires exegetical cartwheels to pretend that the eucharist is other than our Lord intended us to accept it is body, blood , flesh.
Also study the reality of how faith was passed down, paradosis, tradition. The early church was certainly NOT sola scriptura - faith was passed by true meaning of tradition - "stay true to the traditions we taught you by word of mouth" Because that was the means of handing on faith. ( and as Paul says, and did, by letter)
It is fascinating that the original church now catholic church uses the literal translations of scripture in almost all cases and always has : eg real body and blood in the eucharist, Peter IS the rock, the woman of revelations 12 is indeed Mary etc etc....
And the so called sola scriptura adherents are those that twist scripture in knots trying to avoid all the obvious meanings! And to a large extent the sola scriptura adherents ignore scripture completely, just cherry picking a verse here and there to ignore all other references to a subject which disagree with them
But then scripture is not, nor does it purport to be a manual of Christian practice - nor does it profess to be the sole or prime truth. Indeed it says it is not ! it says "the pillar of truth is the church" in order to recognise the authority Christ gave to "bind and loose" and the fact that the physical church of apostolic succession was the mechanism and vehicle of truth Christ chose to hand on the faith.
As someone who started in protestant then evangelical, before studing fathers and arriving at Rome, I can say from experience that the catholic church is the most scriptural of all. Indeed..the mass liturgy and worship is wall to wall scripture.
Post citations of the ECF'S, there aren't ant.
Last edited:
Upvote
0