GK Chesterton on Protestant Logic

[chestertonrules]

What is any man who has been in the real outer world, for instance, to make of the everlasting cry that Catholic traditions are condemned by the Bible? It indicates a jumble of topsy-turvy tests and tail-foremost arguments, of which I never could at any time see the sense. The ordinary sensible sceptic or pagan is standing in the street (in the supreme character of the man in the street) and he sees a procession go by of the priests of some strange cult, carrying their object of worship under a canopy, some of them wearing high head-dresses and carrying symbolical staffs, others carrying scrolls and sacred records, others carrying sacred images and lighted candles before them, others sacred relics in caskets or cases, and so on. I can understand the spectator saying, “This is all hocus-pocus”; I can even understand him, in moments of irritation, breaking up the procession, throwing down the images, tearing up the scrolls, dancing on the priests and anything else that might express that general view. I can understand his saying, “Your croziers are bosh, your candles are bosh, your statues and scrolls and relics and all the rest of it are bosh.” But in what conceivable frame of mind does he rush in to select one particular scroll of the scriptures of this one particular group (a scroll which had always belonged to them and been a part of their hocus-pocus, if it was hocus-pocus); why in the world should the man in the street say that one particular scroll was not bosh, but was the one and only truth by which all the other things were to be condemned? Why should it not be as superstitious to worship the scrolls as the statues, of that one particular procession? Why should it not be as reasonable to preserve the statues as the scrolls, by the tenets of that particular creed? To say to the priests, “Your statues and scrolls are condemned by our common sense,” is sensible. To say, “Your statues are condemned by your scrolls, and we are going to worship one part of your procession and wreck the rest,” is not sensible from any standpoint, least of all that of the man in the street.

From : The Catholic Church and Conversion, by G.K. Chesterton

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The Catholic Church and Conversion, by G.K. Chesterton

I was wondering where you got your username.

 

[chestertonrules]

I was wondering where you got your username.

He's my favorite.

A unitarian, then agnostic, then Anglican, then Catholic.

He writes everything from murder mysteries to philosophy to Christian apologetics.

He was a primary influence in the conversion of CS Lewis, among many others.

 

[christianmomof3]

Interesting. So Chesterton thinks that Protestants only reject a few scrolls?
I personally don't call myself a Protestant, but rather a born again Christian, and I reject the procession, the objects of worship (I think only God should be worshipped - not objects), the high symbolic pagan originated headdresses, the staffs, relics, caskets (symbols of death and not of the living God) and candles.

The only thing in that list that I do accept is the word of God.

The RCC did not write the Bible.

The Old Testament was around long before the RCC and the RCC did not write the New Testament either.
They did and do recognize it as the word of God as do other Christians.

The RCC also accepts books as the word of God that many other Christians do not accept as the word of God and apparantly they also accept their processions, headdresses, staffs, relics, caskets and candles as being of God.
I do not see it as contradictory at all to accept the word of the living God as being real and true while rejecting all of the other things.

 

[chestertonrules]

Interesting. So Chesterton thinks that Protestants only reject a few scrolls?
I personally don't call myself a Protestant, but rather a born again Christian, and I reject the procession, the objects of worship (I think only God should be worshipped - not objects), the high symbolic pagan originated headdresses, the staffs, relics, caskets (symbols of death and not of the living God) and candles.

The only thing in that list that I do accept is the word of God.

The RCC did not write the Bible.

The Old Testament was around long before the RCC and the RCC did not write the New Testament either.
They did and do recognize it as the word of God as do other Christians.

The RCC also accepts books as the word of God that many other Christians do not accept as the word of God and apparantly they also accept their processions, headdresses, staffs, relics, caskets and candles as being of God.
I do not see it as contradictory at all to accept the word of the living God as being real and true while rejecting all of the other things.

His point is that the entire procession started long before you made your choice.

The Catholic Church was on it's fifth pope by the time the books of the new testament were even written, let alone compiled into what we now consider scripture.

The only reason you accept that the new testament is the word of God is that it was declared such by the Catholic Church.

Apostolic succession, oral tradition, and the history of the Church are real, but you reject them because of the pride of a few disgruntled Catholics 1500 years later.

 

[tulc]

That Chesterton, he was a hoot!!
tulc(always enjoyed his writings)

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

His point is that the entire procession started long before you made your choice.

The Catholic Church was on it's fifth pope by the time the books of the new testament were even written, let alone compiled into what we now consider scripture.

The only reason you accept that the new testament is the word of God is that it was declared such by the Catholic Church.

Apostolic succession, oral tradition, and the history of the Church are real, but you reject them because of the pride of a few disgruntled Catholics 1500 years later.

I am still a disgruntled ex-RC and I am "catholic" and Christian according to the creeds unless of course you want to call the Creeds a "concoction" of man.

LLOJ [wishes more translations were "CONSISTANT"]

NKJV) Matthew 9:2 Then behold, they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed/klinhV <2825>. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic,

NKJV) Mark 2:4 And when they could not come near Him because of the crowd, they uncovered the roof where He was. So when they had broken through, they let down the bed/krabbaton <2895> on which the paralytic was lying.

 

[sunlover1]

Interesting. So Chesterton thinks that Protestants only reject a few scrolls?
I personally don't call myself a Protestant, but rather a born again Christian, and I reject the procession, the objects of worship (I think only God should be worshipped - not objects), the high symbolic pagan originated headdresses, the staffs, relics, caskets (symbols of death and not of the living God) and candles.

The only thing in that list that I do accept is the word of God.

The RCC did not write the Bible.

The Old Testament was around long before the RCC and the RCC did not write the New Testament either.
They did and do recognize it as the word of God as do other Christians.

The RCC also accepts books as the word of God that many other Christians do not accept as the word of God and apparantly they also accept their processions, headdresses, staffs, relics, caskets and candles as being of God.
I do not see it as contradictory at all to accept the word of the living God as being real and true while rejecting all of the other things.

But what's wrong with candles?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

But what's wrong with candles?

They are like a cop, never one around when ya need 'em.

LLOJ [especially during a power failure like we had last night and ya find out the batteries in the flashlight are dead]

 

[simonthezealot]

The Catholic Church was on it's fifth pope by the time the books of the new testament were even written, let alone compiled into what we now consider scripture.

.

Yeah right...Rome may have been on its 5th bishop, but there was no such thing as universal authority and none of themselves claimed to be the "pope'

 

[chestertonrules]

Yeah right...Rome may have been on its 5th bishop, but there was no such thing as universal authority and none of themselves claimed to be the "pope'

Why was Pope Clement instructing the Church and Corinth?



Check it out:

Clement Letter to the Corinthians 1, 58-59,63[-]
Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy.

St. Clement of Rome

97​

 

[simonthezealot]

Apostolic succession, oral tradition, and the history of the Church are real, but you reject them because of the pride of a few disgruntled Catholics 1500 years later.

It's funny you can accept and acknowledge catholics in the 1500's were unsound biblically yet base much of your theology on ones from the 4th and 5th century, rather than whats clear in scripture? what gives?
We reject it because its a patchwork of 1/2 truths forgeries and contradictory to and absent from scripture doctrines.

 

[simonthezealot]

Why was Pope Clement instructing the Church and Corinth?



Check it out:

Clement Letter to the Corinthians 1, 58-59,63[-]
Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy.


St. Clement of Rome

97​

1st off Dionysis some time later writing to "pope soter" says this about this letter...

Dionysius writing to “Pope” Soter
Referring to the letter Clement wrote to Corinth

"Which we will read for its valuable advice"

No offense but why should I assume you know something more than one of your own Popes, it is not instruction it's valuable advice and furthermore it's from his position as head of the Roman community, there is nothing their to suggest universal authority.

 

[chestertonrules]

It's funny you can accept and acknowledge catholics in the 1500's were unsound biblically yet base much of your theology on ones from the 4th and 5th century, rather than whats clear in scripture? what gives?
We reject it because its a patchwork of 1/2 truths forgeries and contradictory to and absent from scripture doctrines.

I acknowledge no such thing.

Stick to the facts and your arguments will at least have a chance of persuasion!

 

[chestertonrules]

1st off Dionysis some time later writing to "pope soter" says this about this letter...

Dionysius writing to “Pope” Soter
Referring to the letter Clement wrote to Corinth

"Which we will read for its valuable advice"

No offense but why should I assume you know something more than one of your own Popes, it is not instruction it's valuable advice and furthermore it's from his position as head of the Roman community, there is nothing their to suggest universal authority.

So what?

It was not a doctrinal statement.

It was a letter from the leader of the universal Church to a regional Church.

Are you saying that Dionysius was somehow less than Catholic?

Clearly, he acknowledged the pope and addressed him as such in his letter.

 

[chestertonrules]

1st off Dionysis some time later writing to "pope soter" says this about this letter...

Dionysius writing to &#8220;Pope&#8221; Soter
Referring to the letter Clement wrote to Corinth

"Which we will read for its valuable advice"

No offense but why should I assume you know something more than one of your own Popes, it is not instruction it's valuable advice and furthermore it's from his position as head of the Roman community, there is nothing their to suggest universal authority.

You post irrelevant evasions then ignore the question.

Why was Pope Clement sending instructions to the Church at Corinth?

Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I acknowledge no such thing.

Stick to the facts and your arguments will at least have a chance of persuasion!

So you can be persuaded to "come out of Her" if we give ya the facts?

2 Corin 6:16 "Any yet agreement sanctuary of God with idols? For ye are a sanctuary of God are, living, according as said the God: `That I will dwell in them, and will be walking-about, and I will be to them God, and they shall be to Me a People,
17 wherefore, come forth/exelqete <1831> (5628) out of midst of Them, and be separated, saith Lord, and an unclean-thing do not touch, and I--I will receive you,
18 And I shall be to ye as a father, and ye shall be to Me as sons and daughters is saying Lord Almighty/All-Holder/panto-kratwr <3841>'".

Reve 18:4 And I hear another voice out of the heaven, saying, `Come forth/exelqete <1831> (5628)! the People of Me, out of Her, that no ye may not being together-communioning to the Sins of her, and out of the stripes of her that no ye may be getting.

 

[chestertonrules]

So you can be persuaded to "come out of Her" if we give ya the facts?

2 Corin 6:16 "Any yet agreement sanctuary of God with idols? For ye are a sanctuary of God are, living, according as said the God: `That I will dwell in them, and will be walking-about, and I will be to them God, and they shall be to Me a People,
17 wherefore, come forth/exelqete <1831> (5628) out of midst of Them, and be separated, saith Lord, and an unclean-thing do not touch, and I--I will receive you,
18 And I shall be to ye as a father, and ye shall be to Me as sons and daughters is saying Lord Almighty/All-Holder/panto-kratwr <3841>'".

Reve 18:4 And I hear another voice out of the heaven, saying, `Come forth/exelqete <1831> (5628)! the People of Me, out of Her, that no ye may not being together-communioning to the Sins of her, and out of the stripes of her that no ye may be getting.

That's what got me into her!

Facts are stubborn things.

Good luck!

 

[simonthezealot]

You post irrelevant evasions then ignore the question.

Why was Pope Clement sending instructions to the Church at Corinth?

Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy.

Because his insight was respected and valuable are you suggesting that I cant find the same types of letters from ignatius and others like him? I can find dozens if not hundreds...

Here is one just for the fun of it...
The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to Polycarp, Bishop of the Church of the Smyrnaeans, or rather, who has, as his own bishop, God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ: [wishes] abundance of happiness.
Inasmuch as I have not been able to write to all the Churches, because I must suddenly sail from Troas to Neapolis, as the will57 [of the emperor] enjoins, [I beg that] thou, as being acquainted with the purpose58 of God, wilt write to the adjacent Churches, that they also may act in like manner, such as are able to do so sending messengers,59 and the others transmitting letters through those persons who are sent by thee, that thou60 mayest be glorified by a work61 which shall be remembered for ever, as indeed thou art worthy to be.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That's what got me into her!

Facts are stubborn things.

Good luck!

That is what got me "outta her".