A lineage of Popes in unbroken succession

[racer]

Do not be so quick to judge based on only your own opinion.

Why? That's exactly what you've done repeatedly?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Why? That's exactly what you've done repeatedly?

Not completely...

Most of what I say is a teaching that goes back to the first few centuries of Christianity. That is more than opinion.

BTW how is it going?

 

[Rick Otto]

Your swallowing wholesale PR!
It's all brochure copy, sales copy not real!

"1 Simon was the first to know Jesus for being the Messiah. We will continue to see Peter as the First in scripture."

Mary knew first when Gabriel told her in Luke1:31.
Then Joseph got told in a dream.
And wasn't it acknowledged when Mary met Elisabeth?
Or maybe before when the angel spoke to Elisabeth's husband?

Yeah, there it is... Luke1:43!
43: And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

JACK!!! Get a clue, bro. You are bein' proud to belong to a visible organization when all you realy need to cling to is Him. Do that & you can rest assured your a member of the "One True Church".
Needing structure isn't a bad thing, but sacrificing any part of your conscience to be a part of one isn't a good thing.
I don't simply mean to be accusing & judging you, but you have made an untenable assertion about scripture, and it is only one in a daisy chain of assertions that stem from a power seeking center, not a God seeking one.

 

[simonthezealot]

I beg to differ Jack! You've not shown anything remotely close to proof of this in 180 +posts on the White..Papacy... thread!

That is your OPINION.

I felt I have adequately shown the Papacy to be as Jesus intended.

I will add that I have not shown this to some, like your self. But I have had others see my points and their validity.

Do not be so quick to judge based on only your own opinion.

Why? That's exactly what you've done repeatedly?

Not completely...

Most of what I say is a teaching that goes back to the first few centuries of Christianity. That is more than opinion.

BTW how is it going?

Jack and anyone else reading this whom seem to think that the Papacy has held a primacy known to all ages as proclaimed by Vat 1 I encourage you to read through the 180 post debate between Jack and myself title " White, papacy lacking evidence" and see for yourself!

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Your swallowing wholesale PR!
It's all brochure copy, sales copy not real!



Mary knew first when Gabriel told her in Luke1:31.
Then Joseph got told in a dream.
And wasn't it acknowledged when Mary met Elisabeth?
Or maybe before when the angel spoke to Elisabeth's husband?

Yeah, there it is... Luke1:43!
43: And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

JACK!!! Get a clue, bro. You are bein' proud to belong to a visible organization when all you realy need to cling to is Him. Do that & you can rest assured your a member of the "One True Church".
Needing structure isn't a bad thing, but sacrificing any part of your conscience to be a part of one isn't a good thing.
I don't simply mean to be accusing & judging you, but you have made an untenable assertion about scripture, and it is only one in a daisy chain of assertions that stem from a power seeking center, not a God seeking one.

Visible, yes. Visible and Invisible Rick.

I am joyful for being part of the Catholic Church. I think my Pagan existance before the Catholic Church had me clueless. I never felt so protected by God as I do now as a Catholic.

What is more is that I belong to a Church that has it's roots going back to the Apsotles and Christ himself.

The Eucharist has to be the greatest difference though. Where else can I receive the body and blood of Christ and where else can I go for confession and forgiveness?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Jack and anyone else reading this whom seem to think that the Papacy has held a primacy known to all ages as proclaimed by Vat 1 I encourage you to read through the 180 post debate between Jack and myself title " White, papacy lacking evidence" and see for yourself!

I agree.

Cheers!

 

[simonthezealot]

What is more is that I belong to a Church that has it's roots going back to the Apsotles and Christ himself.

I agree.

Cheers!

Has it's roots but is not forthright and truthful as she claims? I am confused how you can find comfort in roots that show discepancy and deceit within its confines...

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Has it's roots but is not forthright and truthful as she claims? I am confused how you can find comfort in roots that show discepancy and deceit within its confines...

The Catholic Church has no deceit or discrepancy in it's teachings.

I think you are confusing human failings of members from the Catholic Church with the Teachings from the Catholic Church.

 

[Trento]

Jack and anyone else reading this whom seem to think that the Papacy has held a primacy known to all ages as proclaimed by Vat 1 I encourage you to read through the 180 post debate between Jack and myself title " White, papacy lacking evidence" and see for yourself!

Then read Answer to James White on the Early Papacy


Quoting the Fathers of the Council of Ephesus and the (258) Bishops
who signed on when the papal legates read out this statement at the council:


"There is no doubt, and in fact has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Coelestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place." (JP&K, 258)

Not to mention the Eastern bishops who wrote to Pope Symmachus (342) or the 250 Eastern bishops who signed the Formula of Pope Hormisdas (268; the authors of JP&K cite Dollinger to the effect that this number eventually climbed to 2500 Eastern signatories).

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Thanks Trento!

 

[simonthezealot]

The Catholic Church has no deceit or discrepancy in it's teachings.

I think you are confusing human failings of members from the Catholic Church with the Teachings from the Catholic Church.

Tell me does a "papal bull" qualify as the "teachings"?

 

[simonthezealot]

Thanks Trento!

For what??? 4th century Ephesus comments!

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Tell me does a "papal bull" qualify as the "teachings"?

If it is a Teaching of the Church then Yes.

Things like Doctrine and Dogma.

You know... the things necessary for salvation.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

For what??? 4th century Ephesus comments!

For his defense of Mother Church.

 

[simonthezealot]

For what??? 4th century Ephesus comments!

Ooops I meant 5th century otherwise known as the
Eutychian robber-council of Ephesus (449)

Curious either of you ever read Schaffs' opinions of the fathers?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Ooops I meant 5th century otherwise known as the
Eutychian robber-council of Ephesus (449)

Curious either of you ever read Schaffs' opinions of the fathers?

As I stated earlier, I do not know Schaff.

I am more devoted to understanding scripture and the teachings of the church currently. I also like to read about the ECF.

But... who is Schaff and where are you headed with this?

 

[simonthezealot]

"There is no doubt, and in fact has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Coelestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place." (JP&K, 258)

Indeed this was said. But whom said it trento?
It was stated by the Papal legate, Philip the presbyter
Extracts from Session III
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-1...m#P4490_861140
Wow. A papal representative in discussions on the floor proposing that his master is the head of the church.
Did the Council then just hear what Celestine had ruled and then agree, or did they go on to debate?
Trento, you're grossly misrepersenting the evidence, which is of 'debate', not of 'conclusion'.
It's like as if I cited a pro choice member of the senate making a speech in congress to then claim that this is what congress supports...

Odd then that when they wrote to the Pope, their letter concludes
"And we all were of the same mind, holding them deposed. And that you may know in full all things that have been done, we have sent you a copy of the Acts, and of the subscriptions of the Synod. We pray that you, dearly beloved t and most longed for, may be strong andmindful of us in the Lord"
The Letter of the Synod to Pope Coelestine.
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-1...m#P4669_911144
Note that the Council holds Nestor deposed. Pope Coelestine held a synod in Rome in which he condemned Nestorius. He then wrote to Cyril informing him of this decision. Importantly, Cyril convened a council in Alexandria to discuss the issues raised in the Pope's letter, and they too discussed the issue and then also condemned Nestorius.
This is important, because even though the "Pope" had ruled on this, and had informed Cyril, Cyril did not just follow the Pope’s lead, but instead called a council of those in his own See. This was because as Cyril understood it, he was the chief of his own area. What was ruled in Rome did not affect him. Surely, it did influence him, but the findings in Rome did not mean that the whole church immediately thought the issue was settled.

 

[simonthezealot]

As I stated earlier, I do not know Schaff.

I am more devoted to understanding scripture and the teachings of the church currently. I also like to read about the ECF.

But... who is Schaff and where are you headed with this?

Schaff is probably the foremost historical Christian author, respected both by catholics and protestants for his unbiased view of the early church. If you spend anytime reading ECF's you'll come across Phillip Schaff.
I would just recommend going to ccel.org or one of those place and reading opinions of the fathers instead of cut-n-paste from newadvent.com and matt16:18.com and those...(not accusing, just saying) Schaff's opinions of the father's is a revealing read...highly recommended!

 

[JacktheCatholic]

And why did Cyril hold a council?

Can you say with out a doubt one way or the other?

I suspect he held a council to inform his people about what the Pope decided so they could convey it to the rest of the church.

What say you?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Schaff is probably the foremost historical Christian author, respected both by catholics and protestants for his unbiased view of the early church. If you spend anytime reading ECF's you'll come across Phillip Schaff.
I would just recommend going to ccel.org or one of those place and reading opinions of the fathers instead of cut-n-paste from newadvent.com and matt18:18.com and those...(not accusing, just saying) Schaff's opinions of the father's is a revealing read...highly recommended!

I am guilty of using Newadvent a lot.

But I also use Wikipedia (not the best I know).

Another is Catholic Answers.

I will look up this Schaff guy.

I doubt he is on a level with Thomas Aquinas though.