ECF Contextual correctness....

[lionroar0]

Things are quickly becoming more available on google book, many of the seemingly out of context snippets are beginning to be available...The intention here is for the long term.

I'll check it out.

Peace

 

[simonthezealot]

"I would not believe the holy Gospels if it were not for the authority of the Holy Catholic Church"
- St. Augustine

 

[tz620q]

"I would not believe the holy Gospels if it were not for the authority of the Holy Catholic Church"
- St. Augustine

I found this in "The Faith of the Early Fathers" by William Jurgens.

Against the Letter of Mani Called "The Foundation" (A.D. 397) was a treatise by Augustine to refute Mani's letter.

"In the Catholic Church, not to speak of that purest wisdom, to the knowledge of which a few spiritual men attain in this life, in such a way that, in its least part only, for they are but men, they know it without any doubting, while the restof the multitude finds its greatest safety not in lively understanding but in the simplicity of believing, - not to speak, I say, of that wisdom which you do not believe is present in the Catholic Church, there are many other things which, most properly, can keep me in her bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the Apostle Peter, to whom our Lord, after His resurrection, gave the charge of feeding His sheep, up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And at last, the very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called Catholic, when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house.

If you should find someone who does not yet believe in the Gospel, what would you answer him when he says: "I do not believe?" Indeed, I would not believe in the Gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not influence me to do so."

I found many sites referencing Jurgens, but none that supplied the full treatise, which Jurgens says was only the start of a longer work.

 

[simonthezealot]

Thanks TZ...

 

[simonthezealot]

Here is one i've only found in greek...Looking for translated version in FULL context...

John Chrysostom...

"Peter, that head of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who received the revelation not from man but from the Father....this Peter, and when I say Peter, I mean the unbroken Rock, the unshaken foundation, the great apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called, the first to obey." (De Eleemos III, 4, vol II, 298[300])

 

[simonthezealot]

ANYONE have the full context on this???????
Eusebius

"[In the second] year of the two hundredth and fifth Olympiad [A.D. 42]: The apostle Peter, after he has established the church in Antioch, wentt to Rome, where he remains as a bishop of that city, preaching the gospel for twenty-five years" (The Chronicle [A.D. 303]).

 

[beamishboy]

ANYONE have the full context on this???????

"[In the second] year of the two hundredth and fifth Olympiad [A.D. 42]: The apostle Peter, after he has established the church in Antioch, wentt to Rome, where he remains as a bishop of that city, preaching the gospel for twenty-five years" (The Chronicle [A.D. 303]).

Goodness me! I don't think I can contribute to this thread beyond saying that I'm totally confused. So Simon, looks like this novice of yours needs more training. Hehe.

 

[simonthezealot]

Goodness me! I don't think I can contribute to this thread beyond saying that I'm totally confused. So Simon, looks like this novice of yours needs more training. Hehe.

Hey kiddo what drove me to start this thread was people quoting little tidbits to sell there view...Once I started searching for them in their larger context I found they really didnt mean what people were attempting for them to say... This is an integrity thread, to put all SNIPPETS in the fullest context available...Hope that helps...

 

[tz620q]

ANYONE have the full context on this???????
Eusebius

"[In the second] year of the two hundredth and fifth Olympiad [A.D. 42]: The apostle Peter, after he has established the church in Antioch, wentt to Rome, where he remains as a bishop of that city, preaching the gospel for twenty-five years" (The Chronicle [A.D. 303]).

I found the following in tertullian.org
The Chronicle is a list of historical events using the Olympiads and years in the reign of both Roman emperors and Jewish princes as time markers and chronicling each event based on the year after the Olympiad in which is occured. Written by Eusebius, it has been preserved by a Latin translation by Jerome and a couple of Armenian translations. The Latin manuscript is online in folio format from Oxford's Merton college here is the link to the folio:
http://image.ox.ac.uk/images/merton/ms315/f129r.jpg

In English, on page 261, this says
205th Olympiad
Year 2 of the reign of Claudius in Rome, Year 5 of the reign of Agrippa, Prince of the Jews
Peter the Apostle, by nation a Galilean, first high priest of the Christians, after he had been the first to found a church at Antioch, proceeded to Rome, where as bishop of the same city he remains, preaching the gospel for 25 years.

 

[beamishboy]

Hey kiddo what drove me to start this thread was people quoting little tidbits to sell there view...Once I started searching for them in their larger context I found they really didnt mean what people were attempting for them to say... This is an integrity thread, to put all SNIPPETS in the fullest context available...Hope that helps...

Hi Simon,

Yes, I get the picture but I see it's a lot of reading. Too much for this novice. But I can see how important it is. I was quite impressed when you exposed Trento's misquotation. I read it only because you wrote it in large luminous green font. Hehe. The beamishboy is attracted to colours.

But I thought it was really cool. You had in your hands evidence that should bring any guilty party to his knees. Yes, I see the importance of reading the ECF's words in their proper context. My vicar told me once that when RCs quote Scriptures, I should always look at them in their proper context. I've done that once in an argument in GT and managed to trap them. But they still insisted on their interpretation. So, there's really no getting them to admit to something that is as clear as daylight, I think. They'll just refuse.

 

[simonthezealot]

I found the following in tertullian.org
The Chronicle is a list of historical events using the Olympiads and years in the reign of both Roman emperors and Jewish princes as time markers and chronicling each event based on the year after the Olympiad in which is occured. Written by Eusebius, it has been preserved by a Latin translation by Jerome and a couple of Armenian translations. The Latin manuscript is online in folio format from Oxford's Merton college here is the link to the folio:
http://image.ox.ac.uk/images/merton/ms315/f129r.jpg

In English, on page 261, this says
205th Olympiad
Year 2 of the reign of Claudius in Rome, Year 5 of the reign of Agrippa, Prince of the Jews
Peter the Apostle, by nation a Galilean, first high priest of the Christians, after he had been the first to found a church at Antioch, proceeded to Rome, where as bishop of the same city he remains, preaching the gospel for 25 years.

While I can't read latin well, are you saying this is a Eusebius writng preserved by Jerome?...
I did find it is from here..."de vir. ill. c. 1" but I am unaware yet what that is...
I did find this at ccel.org
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc1.i.IV_1.26.html

The tradition of a twenty-five years’ episcopate in Rome (preceded by a seven years’ episcopate in Antioch) cannot be traced beyond the fourth century (Jerome), and arose, as already remarked, from chronological miscalculations in connection with the questionable statement of Justin Martyr concerning the arrival of Simon Magus in Rome under the reign of Claudius (41–54). The "Catalogus Liberianus," the oldest list of popes (supposed to have been written before 366), extends the pontificate of Peter to 25 years, 1 month, 9 days, and puts his death on June 29, 65 (during the consulate of Nerva and Vestinus), which would date his arrival in Rome back to a.d. 40. Eusebius, in his Greek Chronicle as far as it is preserved, does not fix the number of years, but says, in his Church History, that Peter came to Rome in the reign of Claudius to preach against the pestilential errors of Simon Magus.312312 Hist. Eccl. II. 14. His statement is merely an inference from Justin Martyrs story about Simon Magus, which he quotes in ch. 13. But Justin M. says nothing about Simon Peter in that connection. The Armenian translation of his Chronicle mentions "twenty" years;313313 "Petrus apostolus, cum primum Antiochenam ecclesiam fundasset, Romanorum urbem proficiscitur, ibique evangelium praedicat, et commoratur illic antistes ecclesiae annis viginti." Jerome, in his translation or paraphrase rather, "twenty-five" years, assuming, without warrant, that Peter left Jerusalem for Antioch and Rome in the second year of Claudius (42; but Acts 12:17 would rather point to the year 44), and died in the fourteenth or last year of Nero (68).314314 Chr., ad ann. 44: "Petrus ... cum primum Antiochenam ecclesiam fundasset, Romam proficiscitur, ubi evangelium praedicans 25 annis ejusdem urbis episcopus perseverat."InDe viris illustr. cap. I, Jerome omits Antioch and says: "Simon Petrus ... secundo Claudii imperatoris anno, ad expugnandum Simonem Magum, Romam pergit, ibique, viginti quinque annis Cathedram Sacerdotatem tenuit, usque ad ultimum annum Neronis, id est, decimum quartum. A quo et affixus cruci, martyrio coronatus est, capite ad terram verso, et in sublime pedibus elevatis: asserens se indignum qui sic crucifigeretur ut Dominus suus. Among modern Roman Catholic historians there is no agreement as to the year of Peter’s martyrdom: Baronius puts it in 69;315315 Annal. ad ann. 69. Tom. I. 590, comp. I. 272, ed. Theiner. Pagi and Alban Butler in 65; Möhler, Gams, and Alzog indefinitely between 66 and 68. In all these cases it must be assumed that the Neronian persecution was continued or renewed after 64, of which we have no historical evidence. It must also be assumed that Peter was conspicuously absent from his flock during most of the time, to superintend the churches in Asia Minor and in Syria, to preside at the Council of Jerusalem, to meet with Paul in Antioch, to travel about with his wife, and that he made very little impression there till 58, and even till 63, when Paul, writing to and from Rome, still entirely ignores him. Thus a chronological error is made to overrule stubborn facts. The famous saying that "no pope shall see the (twenty-five) years of Peter," which had hitherto almost the force of law, has been falsified by the thirty-two years’ reign of the first infallible pope) Pius IX., who ruled from 1846 to 1878.

 

[tz620q]

While I can't read latin well, are you saying this is a Eusebius writng preserved by Jerome?...

According to tertullian.com.

" Jerome’s work itself was a translation into Latin of the Chronicle of Eusebius of Caesarea, brought up to date, but it was through Jerome that it came to be so influential. ....

St. Jerome as a young man spent time in the East and became familiar with a great deal of the scholarship of the school of Origen and Eusebius. He came across a copy of the Chronological Canons and recognised its importance. As with other works by Eusebius, such as the Onomasticon, he arranged to translate it. He had a skilled scribe draw up a volume with the numerals in Latin rather than Greek – no trivial task –, and then dictated a translation of the contents.
He also added his own comments where he felt that Roman history had been neglected. Finally he composed a continuation down to his own times, ending with the disastrous defeat and death of the emperor Valens at the hands of the Goths at Adrianople in 378 AD. "

So to answer your question, yes and no. Jerome used Eusebius as a starting point and added his own content for the years 326-378. Schaff says, "Eusebius, in his Greek Chronicle as far as it is preserved, does not fix the number of years".; but does not cite where he found a different manuscript of Eusebius' Chronicles that omits the number of years. We are left with just Jerome and the Armenian translations and both cite a number of years (25 for Jerome and 20 for the Armenian translation).

I have a hard time following Schaff's logic in this part of his book "History of the Christian World." He uses an argument from silence to say that Peter was not prominent in Rome because it was not mentioned in the New Testament; but to do this he has to deny the reliability of Irenaeus, Origen, Tertullian, and Eusebius.

I did find it is from here..."de vir. ill. c. 1" but I am unaware yet what that is...

This is a reference to Jerome's "De Viris Illustribus" (On Illustrious Men). He says in it "I must acknowledge that Eusebius Pamphilus in the ten books of his Church History has been of the utmost assistance".

De Viris Illustribus contains 135 chapters, each one about a different illustrious man. Chapter 1 is about Peter and quoted below from the NewAdvent web site.

"Simon Peter the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion — the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia— pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord. He wrote two epistles which are called Catholic, the second of which, on account of its difference from the first in style, is considered by many not to be by him. Then too the Gospel according to Mark, who was his disciple and interpreter, is ascribed to him. On the other hand, the books, of which one is entitled his Acts, another his Gospel, a third his Preaching, a fourth his Revelation, a fifth his Judgment are rejected as apocryphal.
Buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way he is venerated by the whole world.

 

[simonthezealot]

This is a reference to Jerome's "De Viris Illustribus" (On Illustrious Men). He says in it "I must acknowledge that Eusebius Pamphilus in the ten books of his Church History has been of the utmost assistance".

De Viris Illustribus contains 135 chapters, each one about a different illustrious man. Chapter 1 is about Peter and quoted below from the NewAdvent web site.

Thanks TZ I NOW see that the Chronicles are a bunch of single paragragh chronological statements and I understand well, and even read schaffs intro on the "illustrious men" http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf203.v.iii.ii.html

So really to the snippet I posted above there really is no more fuller context than what was there...

 

[simonthezealot]

I've seen this quoted but can find nothing of the likes in any context other than what seems like an out of place snippet taken from Jurgens F.O.T.F's

"A man cannot have salvation, except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church he can have everything except salvation. He can have honor, he can have Sacraments, he can sing alleluia, he can answer amen, he can possess the gospel, he can have and preach faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; but never except in the Catholic Church will he be able to find salvation."
(St Augustine, Discourse to the People of the Church at Caesarea. 418 A.D)

 

[simonthezealot]

Another one from Theodoret "questions on Genesis and exodus"
CAN'T FIND IT ONLINE...
I am not so bold as to affirm any which the sacred scriptures passeth in silence, we ought not to seek those things passed in silence, but rest in the things written.
Theodoret in Gen. qu 45

 

[simonthezealot]

bump

 

[simonthezealot]

Here is one Trento tried to use against Sola Scriptura and in favor of Tradition.

"But the Councils which they are now setting in motion, what colourable pretext have they? If any new heresy has risen since the Arian, let them tell us the positions which it has devised, and who are its inventors? and in their own formula, let them anathematize the heresies antecedent to this Council of theirs, among which is the Arian, as the Nicene Fathers did, that it may appear that they too have some cogent reason for saying what is novel. But if no such event has happened, and they have it not to shew, but rather they themselves are uttering heresies, as holding Arius's irreligion, and are exposed day by day, and day by day shift their ground, what need is there of Councils, when the Nicene is sufficient, as against the Arian heresy, so against the rest, which it has condemned one and all by means of the sound faith?"
De Synodis 6(A.D. 362),in NPNF2,IV:453

When i checked the fuller context, here is what was revealed...

Its from HERE...Check out what it goes on to say, especially the part in red

6. But the Councils which they are now setting in motion, what colourable pretext have they ? If any new heresy has risen since the Arian, let them tell us the positions which it has devised, and who are its inventors? and in their own formula, let them anathematize the heresies antecedent to this Council of theirs, among which is the Arian, as the Nicene Fathers did, that it may appear that they too have some cogent reason for saying what is novel. But if no such event has happened, and they have it not to shew, but rather they themselves are uttering heresies, as holding Arius’s irreligion, and are exposed day by day, and day by day shift their ground, what need is there of Councils, when the Nicene is sufficient, as against the Arian heresy, so against the rest, which it has condemned one and all by means of the sound faith? For even the notorious Aetius, who was surnamed godless, vaunts not of the discovering of any mania of his own, but under stress of weather has been wrecked upon Arianism, himself and the persons whom he has beguiled. Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.

 

[Christian Commando]

Hi everyone-

I would suggest tho, for all the interest this subject seems to have generated, we be careful in this thread concerning authorship of particular writings used. Why? St. augustine was very well known, as one of the first Christians made prominant of his adopting a purely- "Spiritualized", thus unreliable belief system for interpreting God's Word.

His system adopted simply stated, was known as "Amillenialism" which taught of no Rapture of the church, no millenial reign of Christ on Earth, plus alot more deceptions of Satan.

Secondly- St. Augustine was claimed in this "Treaties", as interpreting Jesus to have "pondered on the dead" after the "Passover" was done. Why would He do this?

Why would Jesus think on that? He specifically shared comments in the 4 Gospels about knowing why He was here and what was to happen. And being "God in the flesh, Jesus already knew who was in Paradise and hell and every jot and title about them. Whats to ponder on concerning them?

Some false interpretations claim Jesus being afraid of His up coming torment, Death and weight of sin on him to come when asked that this cup pass from him while in the garden of Gethseminy.

False- God's word declares while praying in the garden, great drops of sweat/blood dripped from Him. This was Satan wanting to try and have Jesus die before He could accomplish conquering sin and death later on the cross.

Why would Jesus fear any of that, knowing God would raise Him from the dead a few days later and be delivered, just as all God's children will be from earth and transfigured to sinless purity?

If we really want to Glorify God in all things we do, let us choose subjects and authors worthy of discussing, in order to truely uplift and Glorify God, not degrade Him thru false or tainted Teachings.

Try discussing subjects from "Biblical Commentaries" from people such as Annanius, Simeon, James, Zacchaus, Ironeus, Turtulian, Avilius, Linus, Ignatius or others as such.

God Bless!!

 

[simonthezealot]

Hi everyone-

I would suggest tho, for all the interest this subject seems to have generated, we be careful in this thread concerning authorship of particular writings used. Why? St. augustine was very well known, as one of the first Christians made prominant of his adopting a purely- "Spiritualized", thus unreliable belief system for interpreting God's Word.

His system adopted simply stated, was known as "Amillenialism" which taught of no Rapture of the church, no millenial reign of Christ on Earth, plus alot more deceptions of Satan.

Secondly- St. Augustine was claimed in this "Treaties", as interpreting Jesus to have "pondered on the dead" after the "Passover" was done. Why would He do this?

Why would Jesus think on that? He specifically shared comments in the 4 Gospels about knowing why He was here and what was to happen. And being "God in the flesh, Jesus already knew who was in Paradise and hell and every jot and title about them. Whats to ponder on concerning them?

Some false interpretations claim Jesus being afraid of His up coming torment, Death and weight of sin on him to come when asked that this cup pass from him while in the garden of Gethseminy.

False- God's word declares while praying in the garden, great drops of sweat/blood dripped from Him. This was Satan wanting to try and have Jesus die before He could accomplish conquering sin and death later on the cross.

Why would Jesus fear any of that, knowing God would raise Him from the dead a few days later and be delivered, just as all God's children will be from earth and transfigured to sinless purity?

If we really want to Glorify God in all things we do, let us choose subjects and authors worthy of discussing, in order to truely uplift and Glorify God, not degrade Him thru false or tainted Teachings.

Try discussing subjects from "Biblical Commentaries" from people such as Annanius, Simeon, James, Zacchaus, Ironeus, Turtulian, Avilius, Linus, Ignatius or others as such.

God Bless!!

Thanks for the insight CC and welcome to christian forums, i in no way advocate the teaching of these early christians. What i do have an issue with is people quoting these people to forward there view ONLY to find out they have stripped them from the intended context.
A perfect example is Ignatius letter to the Smyrnean where he is writing on docetism and people have tried using this incorrectly as leverage or proof for transubstantiation.