GK Chesterton on Protestant Logic

[Sojourner<><]

Peter denied Jesus three times.

All the apostles fled during the crucifixion at one point.

Peter cut off the guard's ear in the garden.

I don't think apostolic succession makes a priest less likely to sin.

Sure but at that point they were disciples. It wasn't until later that they received authority.

A point you need to consider about the inquisitions is that they were carried out by national governments, often with the blessing of the local church, but they were not commanded by Rome.

I'd like to know if you think this is inaccurate.

On July 21, 1542 Pope Paul III, with the Constitution Licet ab initio, established the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, staffed by cardinals and other officials whose task it was "to maintain and defend the integrity of the faith and to examine and proscribe errors and false doctrines". It served as the final court of appeal in trials of heresy and served as an important part of the Counter-Reformation. In reaction to the excesses of the Spanish Inquisition, it was tightly controlled by strict procedural rules under the administration of Francisco Peña, but the Inquisition remained one of the most feared offices in 16th century Europe, and elsewhere in the Catholic world, due especially to its use of torture and execution, including immolation.

Source


I don't mean to suggest that all Popes were evil or that we should pick them apart for all of their faults, but when the Church is led to do the wrong thing by its leader, how can we call that leadership inspired?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

deleted by LLOJ................

 

[chestertonrules]

Sure but at that point they were disciples. It wasn't until later that they received authority.



I'd like to know if you think this is inaccurate.



Source


I don't mean to suggest that all Popes were evil or that we should pick them apart for all of their faults, but when the Church is led to do the wrong thing by its leader, how can we call that leadership inspired?

(((Sure but at that point they were disciples. It wasn't until later that they received authority.
)))


That's not accurate.

Peter had already been given the keys and the power of binding and loosing. All the apostles had been given the power of binding and loosing.



Re:

On July 21, 1542 Pope Paul III, with the Constitution Licet ab initio, established the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, staffed by cardinals and other officials whose task it was "to maintain and defend the integrity of the faith and to examine and proscribe errors and false doctrines". It served as the final court of appeal in trials of heresy and served as an important part of the Counter-Reformation. In reaction to the excesses of the Spanish Inquisition, it was tightly controlled by strict procedural rules under the administration of Francisco Peña, but the Inquisition remained one of the most feared offices in 16th century Europe, and elsewhere in the Catholic world, due especially to its use of torture and execution, including immolation.


It seems accurate. It in no way indicates that the church approved of torture and executions.

It does clearly state that the goal of the Church was "to maintain and defend the integrity of the faith and to examine and proscribe errors and false doctrines".

Please note that this is the only quote from actual church documents in this description.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

no post.................

 

[chestertonrules]

As long as you say it is not just the RCC. Or else you are just "spinning your wheels" again with us.
Do you ever read the Bible or do you just read the writings of Men?

Catholics believe all the bible, even this:

John 20
21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."

1 Timothy 3
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

2 Thes 2
15So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Matthew 16

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Catholics believe all the bible, even this

Glad to hear that. Then quit quoting the writings of Men outside the BIble.
Btw, doesn't the RCC believe they are in the Millennium now

Edit to add: what does Chesterton say about that?

Luke 19:41 And as He nears, beholding the City and He laments/eklausen <2799> (5656) on Her,

Reve 18:9 and shall be lamenting/klausontai <2799> (5695) and shall be bewailing/beating-breasts over Her the kings of the Land the ones with her fornicating and indulging whenever they may be observing the smoke of the refining fire of her.

http://christianforums.com/t7164949-do-not-weep-the-great-city.html#post46402357

 

[chestertonrules]

Glad to hear that. Then quit quoting the writings of Men outside the BIble.
Btw, doesn't the RCC believe they are in the Millennium now

Edit to add: what does Chesterton say about that?

Luke 19:41 And as He nears, beholding the City and He laments/eklausen <2799> (5656) on Her,

Reve 18:9 and shall be lamenting/klausontai <2799> (5695) and shall be bewailing/beating-breasts over Her the kings of the Land the ones with her fornicating and indulging whenever they may be observing the smoke of the refining fire of her.

http://christianforums.com/t7164949-do-not-weep-the-great-city.html#post46402357

The understanding of the early Church is important. The bible tells us to hold fast to the traditions passed on to us.

How can we confirm these oral traditions without studying the practices of the early Christians.


Just because two men read the same bible doesn't mean that both will gain the truth.

The interpretation of the Holy Spirit is key. Jesus gave us a Church to keep his message unified.

You feel the need to form your own interpretations, rejecting those sent by Christ.

 

[chestertonrules]

What does Pope LLOJ interpret these verses to mean?

John 20
21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."

1 Timothy 3
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

2 Thes 2
15So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Matthew 16

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You feel the need to form your own interpretations, rejecting those sent by Christ

And I REJECT the interpretations of the RCC as do most non-RC's. And your point?


2 Thessalonians 1:10 when He may be coming/elqh <2064> (5632) to be glorified in His saints, and to be marvelled in all those having Faith that was believed the Testimony of us upon ye in the Day, that

Reve 14:14 And I saw and Behold! A white cloud, and on the cloud One sitting like a Son of Man,having upon of the head of him a golden wreath, and in the hand of him,a sharp sickle.

 

[chestertonrules]

((( And I REJECT the interpretations of the RCC as do most non-RC's. And your point?)))

That is my point. You reject those sent by Christ.

Jesus gave the apostles authority. They used that authority to preserve the truth and start a Church. They appointed successors. These successors still exist and function as a unit.

80 AD St. Clement of Rome Letter to the Corinthians 42, 44[-]
The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus says the Scripture a certain place, "I will appoint their bishops s in righteousness, and their deacons in faith." ...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That is my point. You reject those sent by Christ.

You never answered my question. Do not the RCs believe they are in the "millennium" now? If so, I REJECT that interpretion. What say ye.

http://www.gotquestions.org/amillennialism.html

According to Amillennialism, the millennium of Revelation 20:1&#8211;6 is being fulfilled spiritually in the present age before the return of Jesus Christ. Thus, the millennium or kingdom of Christ is in existence now. Amillennialists affirm that the millennium began with the resurrection and/or ascension of Christ and will be consummated when Jesus returns again to establish the Eternal Kingdom that is discussed in Revelation 21&#8211;22.

 

[simonthezealot]

Repeating things over and over does NOT make them anymore convincing, at least not anyone with an open mind.

Dionysius of Corinth


"For from the beginning it has been your custom to do good to all the brethren in various ways and to send contributions to all the churches in every city. . . . This custom your blessed Bishop Soter has not only preserved, but is augmenting, by furnishing an abundance of supplies to the saints and by urging with consoling words, as a loving father his children, the brethren who are journeying" (Letter to Pope Soter in Eusebius, Church History 4:23:9 [A.D. 170]).

You missed this middle part where it clearly shows dionysus is COMMENDING, it is he who presides over soter.....

Look

“For from the beginning it has been your practice to do good to all the brethren in various ways, and to send contributions to many churches in every city. Thus relieving the want of the needy, and making provision for the brethren in the mines by the gifts which you have sent from the beginning, you Romans keep up the hereditary customs of the Romans, which your blessed bishop Soter has not only maintained, .....

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Repeating things over and over does NOT make them anymore convincing, at least not anyone with an open mind.

Where is that picture of a "broken record"

 

[chestertonrules]

Repeating things over and over does NOT make them anymore convincing, at least not anyone with an open mind.

I highlighted key words that you seem to be ignoring.

Why would Rome send contributions to ALL THE CHURCHES IN EVERY CITY?

Dionysius then compares this ministering to a loving father caring for his Children.

If this is the best you can do to make a case against the papacy, then you better give up!

 

[Trento]

Repeating things over and over does NOT make them anymore convincing, at least not anyone with an open mind.

It's hard to open anyones mind when they don't even believe in their own Protestant historian scholars.

Protestant Historical scholar Harnack says about Rome,

Ignatius is our first external witness in regard to the Roman Church in 110AD. After making allowances for exaggeration of language in his letter to the Romans, it remains clear that Ignatius assigns a de facto primacy to the Roman Church among its sister churches and that he knew of an energetic and habitual activity of this church in protecting and instructing other churches. The Church and Infallibility pg. 140 (c. 1954
Taking into account the phenomenon of development, the notion of primacy needs to be established first. The Church of Rome enjoyed a Primacy over the other Churches from the earliest period for which we have records with indications that this priority was not an innovation. Dr. Harnack claimed that "The Roman Church from the end of the first century possessed a de facto primacy in Christendom" (Mission und Ausbreitung pg. 398). When even a liberal Protestant scholar such as Dr. Harnack makes such a concession as this, how can we argue about this issue?

Ignatius is our first external witness in regard to the Roman Church in 110AD. After making allowances for exaggeration of language in his letter to the Romans, it remains clear that Ignatius assigns a de facto primacy to the Roman Church among its sister churches and that he knew of an energetic and habitual activity of this church in protecting and instructing other churches. The Church and Infallibility pg. 140 (c. 1954

Protestant scholar John Lawson’s work The Biblical Theology of St. Irenaeus had this to say about the Bishop of Lyons and his view of the Roman church and its primacy: ​

[W]hat church can compare with Rome? She is the life-work of the two greatest Apostles, known of all and knowing all, she is a supreme witness to the unified voice of the Church. If it is necessary for each and all to consent to the voice of the whole Church, how necessary is it for all to consent to Rome? To S. Irenaeus Rome was most certainly an authority none must question, as she cannot be imagined as ever in error. The word ‘infallible’ to some extent begs the question, for the use of it imports into the discussion the results of later definition. It is nevertheless a word which is difficult to do without. With this proviso we may say that Irenaeus regarded Rome as the very corner-stone and typification of a whole structure of ecclesiastical infallibility. The Church and Infallibility by B.C. Butler pgs. 136-137 (c. 1954​

Protestant J.B. Lightfoot Church historian scholar-- commenting on Clements letter to the Cornithians A D 90

'It may perhaps seem strange to describe this noble remonstrance as the first step towards papal dominion. And yet undoubtedly this is the case'​

St. Clement of Rome, pg 698.​

Protestant Philip Schaff states in History of the Christian Church, volume 2 (Eerdmans, 1910) ​

"Rome was the battle-field of orthodoxy and heresy, and a resort of all sects and parties. It attracted from every direction what was true and false in philosophy and religion. Ignatius rejoiced in the prospect of suffering for Christ in the centre of the world; Polycarp repaired hither to settle with Anicetus the paschal controversy; Justin Martyr presented there his defense of Christianity to the emperors, and laid down for it his life; Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Cyprian conceded to that church a position of singular pre-eminence. Rome was equally sought as a commanding position by heretics and theosophic jugglers, as Simon Magus, Valentine, Marcion, Cerdo, and a host of others. No wonder, then, that the bishops of Rome at an early date were looked upon as metropolitan pastors, and spoke and acted accordingly with an air of authority which reached far beyond their immediate diocese." (Schaff, page 157)​

On St. Clement of Rome (c. 96 AD), reckoned as the fourth Pope from St. Peter, Schaff states --​

"...it can hardly be denied that the document [Clement to the Corinthians] reveals the sense of a certain superiority over all ordinary congregations. The Roman church here, without being asked (as far as appears), gives advice, with superior administrative wisdom, to an important church in the East, dispatches messengers to her, and exhorts her to order and unity in a tone of calm dignity and authority, as the organ of God and the Holy Spirit. This is all the more surprising if St. John, as is probable, was then still living in Ephesus, which was nearer to Corinth than Rome." (Schaff, page 158)​

Simon Try not to justify your denominations existence by calumnizing the Church which Jesus Christ founded. Following the plan of the reformers. If you break from the Church of truth, what justification can you possibly show for doing so? There can be only one truth, so the only other recourse is to try to show error. If the proofs of error are not to be found, then invent some. Thus the invention becomes a lie. This is obvious by your statements above when mirrored against the Protestant historical Scholars quoted here.




​

​

)

 

[simonthezealot]

I highlighted key words that you seem to be ignoring.

Do you read anything in context or just go to armstrongs cut n paste supplies for out of context quotes?

Why would Rome send contributions to ALL THE CHURCHES IN EVERY CITY?

Same reason I send contributions to compassion international and worldvision because I am able to...

Dionysius then compares this ministering to a loving father caring for his Children.

Yes and we call pastors shepherds when in reality there is one "true" shepherd...I fail to see any significance here and neither should anyone who reads the WHOLE piece.

If this is the best you can do to make a case against the papacy, then you better give up!

Friend the papacy has NO case...It claims it was known for all ages yet even a passing glance shows it's not the case...in the first 170 years after Christ there is NO evidence save a couple out of context cut n pastes.

At least my friend Jackthecatholic is intellectually honest enough to admit it as a developing doctrine.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It's hard to open anyones mind when they don't even believe in their own Protestant historian scholars.

So who said ALL non-RCs listen to them either?

 

[simonthezealot]

It's hard to open anyones mind when they don't even believe in their own Protestant historian scholars.

Protestant Historical scholar Harnack says about Rome,

I've disputed every one of your false assertions Trento.
I won't waste my time on it anymore. If these guys beleive as you try to suggest they'd be catholic.

 

[Trento]

So who said ALL non-RCs listen to them either?

The truth is, that development is visible in that brief section of the Christian story of which the New Testament books are a fragmentary record, and in the last resort the choice is between accepting the principle of development and rejecting the Christian claim to possess a divine revelation.




Quote Protestant Church historian Philip Schaff, in his History of the Christian Church, Vol. III: Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity (A.D. 70 AD),


Next to the Holy Scriptures, which are themselves a history and depository of divine revelation, there is no stronger proof of the continual presence of Christ with his people, no more thorough vindication of Christianity, no richer source of spiritual wisdom and experience, no deeper incentive to virtue and piety, than the history of Christ's kingdom. Every age has a message from God to man, which is of the greatest importance for man to understand.”
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The early Church fathers steered this young church through turbulent cultural and mythological currents of the world around them. Their writings provided guidance and assurance to early Christians whose faith was not only doctrinally challenged, since copies of Scripture were rare and costly, but who often suffered persecution and even martyrdom. Contemporary believers will find in these records a fascinating glimpse of the first centuries following the death and resurrection of Christ, and will be given rich insight into the growth and history of the Christian Church.[/FONT]
They represent primary evidences of the Canon and the credibility of the New Testament. Written before the Canon was established, the works of the Ante-Nicene Fathers offers itself as a means to defend the Christian faith, to record the martyrdom of the early Christian church body, and to stand as monuments to the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ

 

[Albion]

We've read these same couple of snippets several times before.

Posting and reposting the same material, taken out of context and misinterpreted despite explanations given to you, may make you feel better, but it does nothing for establishing the truth about the early church.

OK?