Spy Wednesday and a Reflection on the Sins of the Clergy

How DARE you drag FACTS into an emotional ‘discussion’!

It was requested.

Tradition does count. It’s the words of Jesus passed on from person to person. How did Paul find out about Jesus appearing to 500 people at once? It’s not in any Gospel......it’s tradition. It was passed by word of mouth to Paul.

Your ignorance of scripture is laughable...

Outreach.

Yes, it was noted; same answer.

So you’re out among the Muslims?

I'm sorry, we are so off-topic it's ridiculous, and I'm not ruining my day with all the drivel being spewed out against the Church!

God bless all of you, as always, including EVERYONE!

Grateful

P.S. That's not an answer. STacticsDD. Boring and counter-productive!

Everybody have a great day, and God bless you!

Special prayers for ALL FReepers tonight for Holy Thursday!

St. Jerome translated the manuscripts for us 300 years or so A.D.. Engaging in semantics is not the point here. It is that today is a good day for us to emphasize, and make a practice of, praying for our clergy at all levels. Whatever the Greek, we Catholics call them “priests.”

Indeed he did.. But my friend he translated the HEBREW into LATIN

Not the New testament but the OLD TESTAMENT.

So your observation has nothing to do with this discussion

The New Testament has no role for the priesthood because Christ fulfilled that type

The NT church had overseers (bishops) ,deacons, pastors and elders. ..no priests

In the early church the pastors were called clerks ..from which we get the word clergy ...

Greg Dues has written Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide (New London: Twenty Third Publications, 2007). On page 166 he states, "Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions."

"A clearly defined local leadership in the form of elders, or presbyteroi, became still more important when the original apostles and disciples of Jesus died. The chief elder in each community was often called the episkopos (Greek, 'overseer'). In English this came to be translated as 'bishop' (Latin, episcopus). Ordinarily he presided over the community's Eucharistic assembly."

"When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice, the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist."

Tradition does count. It’s the words of Jesus passed on from person to person. How did Paul find out about Jesus appearing to 500 people at once? It’s not in any Gospel......it’s tradition. It was passed by word of mouth to Paul.

And which you know by what source? The Scriptures! (1Cor. 15)

And by what transcendent, testable medium did God perpetuate and preserve what He told Moses and others? (Ex. 17:14; Num. 5:23; Dt. 17:18; 31:24; The wholly inspired of God Scriptures!

Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: (Isaiah 30:8)

And on what basis were the Truth claims of Christ established upon? Scriptural substantiation in word and in power! (Jn. 5:36,39; 14:10,11; Lk. 24:44) And upon what was the veracity of the oral preaching of Paul subject to testing by? The wholly inspired of God Scriptures! (Acts 17:11)

The fact that some, and only some, of what is in Scripture was first expressed in oral form does not support a church presuming that because something else existed in oral form, does not justify a church claiming this is also Divine revelation, whether it be Mormonism or Catholicism.

And in the case of the Assumption, it lacks even early historical testimony but which Rome claims to "remember" much later.

Ratzinger writes (emp. mine), Before Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was defined, all theological faculties in the world were consulted for their opinion. Our teachers' answer was emphatically negative . What here became evident was the one-sidedness, not only of the historical, but of the historicist method in theology. “Tradition” was identified with what could be proved on the basis of texts. Altaner, the patrologist from Wurzburg…had proven in a scientifically persuasive manner that the doctrine of Mary’s bodily Assumption into heaven was unknown before the 5C; this doctrine, therefore, he argued, could not belong to the “apostolic tradition. And this was his conclusion, which my teachers at Munich shared.

This argument is compelling if you understand “tradition” strictly as the handing down of fixed formulas and texts [or actual ancient reliable records] …But if you conceive of “tradition” as the living process whereby the Holy Spirit introduces us to the fullness of truth and teaches us how to understand what previously we could still not grasp (cf. Jn 16:12-13) [meaning grasping extraScriptural fables to make them binding doctrines], then subsequent “remembering” (cf. Jn 16:4, for instance) can come to recognize what it has not caught sight of previously [meaning the needed evidence was absent] and was already handed down in the original Word.” [via amorphous oral tradition] - J. Ratzinger, Milestones (Ignatius, n.d.), 58-59.

You do not have Christ at any time because you reject his priests.

By that logic, since as has been clearly shown here, there was no Catholic priesthood in the NT church, then you do not have Christ at any time because you invent a separate class of believers distinctively "priests" by which souls receive Christ.

Then do don’t be in communion with us

You yourself have promoted "Rome Sweet Home," calling for Prot converts by specious Scott, and even worse, “The Protestant’s Dilemma” by the the misrepresenter Rose, reproved here , by God's grace, yet cannot tolerate our posting of such against RCs.

I don’t remember anyone telling you that you had to be a Catholic or go to hell.

Then that is due to you being a relative stranger posting here, and instead you are one of others who suddenly show up protesting the "anti-Catholic" posts while we who have been regulars here for years (by the grace of God), never saw them protesting the anti-Protestant threads that RCs have posted for years, which included the historical claim that one must become a Catholic to be saved.

Moreover, it is not necessarily holding to that claim that warrants a response by us in exposing the spurious nature of Cath claims, but simply promoting the elitist "one true church" is cultic and calls for rebuke.

I guess if there are a subset of annoying bigots in one part of the body of Christ then I’m not sure that justifies that behavior in another part. Let me know when you find a perfect church with no sinners.

Thank you for the correction! I will continue to use the Catholic Church's accepted interpretation of the Bible.

As for Greg Dues:

EWTN Q & A

Question I was perusing a book in our parish library the other day called "Catholic Customs and Traditions" by Greg Dues, and some of it I found uncomfortable. I was skimming through the Holy Orders section and he was saying things like the elders of the different churches around the Holy Land "considered" themselves to be the succesors to the apostles. Also, he was saying things like the priesthood was not like what we understand it today and that the early Church (ie: first century or so) still thought of the priests of the old covenant as their priests and it wasn't until AFTER the destruction of the Temple that the priesthood of the new covenant "evolved" (my word) into what we know it today. Can you help me understand some of this. First, have you heard of this book and is it trustworthy? Second, did Jesus indeed "ordain" the Holy Apostles and they themselves "ordain" bishops, priests, and deacons (I mean, the NT seems to me to clearly show that He and they did!)? And did the Apostles celebrate the liturgy of the Eucharist up until they were kicked out of the Synagogues (sp) by the Hebrews, and then they celebrated the liturgy of the word AND the Eucharist together (what we now know as Holy Mass)? This is a tad confusing for me. I appreciate your help and your work you do to build up the Kingdom!

Answer by Matthew Bunson on 10-15-2002: While at times an interesting work on the cultural environment and traditions of the Church, in my opinion the work lacks sufficient doctrinal clarity. Particularly notable is its lack of theological depth in the area of the sacraments. This is perhaps due to the effort -- no doubt sincere -- to present the work as a popular resource. As a consequence, I would suggest disregarding the book's declarations regarding your questions. It is useful to remember that not every book written about the Church provides reliable information, but parishes and individuals purchase many books simply because they are available, fill some perceived hole in a library, or have attractive covers and interesting titles (one would be surprised how well bad books do with a pleasing presentation).

Thanks anyway, but I'm sticking with the Catholic Church's guidance in this matter- and all others.

God bless you!

Hey! It’s the anti Christ who will set himself up as God in the temple.

I've NOT found this in Scripture.

Nah...

There’s WAY too much stuff to look at before we reply.

It’s a CURSE of this time-lagged method of communication.

Ah... that's a tricky one. That (along with everything else) is up to God. I'll tell them I believe they are wrong, just as I'll tell you I believe you are wrong; but I'm not their judge... I'm not even on the jury.

Neither am I; but I HAVE been called as a WITNESS!

Acts 17:18-19
18. A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, "What is this babbler trying to say?" Others remarked, "He seems to be advocating foreign gods." They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.
19. Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting?

Acts 18:11
So Paul stayed for a year and a half, teaching them the word of God.

Romans 15:4
For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

Romans 16:17
I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

1 Corinthians 4:17
For this reason I am sending to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church.

1 Corinthians 11:2
2. I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings, just as I passed them on to you.

Ephesians 4:14-15
14. Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.
15. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.

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

2 Thessalonians 3:6
In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us.

1 Timothy 1:3-4
3. As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer
4. nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith.

1 Timothy 1:7
They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.

1 Timothy 2:7
And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle--I am telling the truth, I am not lying--and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

1 Timothy 4:1-2
1. The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.
2. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.

1 Timothy 4:6
If you point these things out to the brothers, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, brought up in the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed.

1 Timothy 4:11
Command and teach these things.

1 Timothy 6:3-5
3. If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching,
4. he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions
5. and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.

2 Timothy 1:13
What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 2:15-17
15. Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.
16. Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly.
17. Their teaching will spread like gangrene.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
17. so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Timothy 4:3-4
3. For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
4. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

Titus 1:11
They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach--and that for the sake of dishonest gain.

Titus 2:1
You must teach what is in accord with sound doctrine.

Titus 2:15
These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.

Hebrews 13:9
Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings.

2 Peter 2:1-3
1. But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
3. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

2 John 1:10
If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him.

Now you are calling Catholics Pharisees and saying you are Jesus. Uh huh.

Is that really a BAD thing?

Philippians 2:5 KJV
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

But did they REALLY mean it?

It is useful to remember that not every book written about the Church provides reliable information, but parishes and individuals purchase many books simply because they are available, fill some perceived hole in a library, or have attractive covers and interesting titles (one would be surprised how well bad books do with a pleasing presentation).

Well, can QUOTES from reliable Church Leaders and Teachers be considered ok??

As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the bishops promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1,

Likewise I accept Sacred Scripture according to that sense which Holy mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy scriptures; nor will I ever receive and interpret them except according to the unanimous consent of the fathers. — http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/firstvc.htm

Yet as the Dominican cardinal and Catholic theologian Yves Congar O.P. states,

Unanimous patristic consent as a reliable locus theologicus is classical in Catholic theology; it has often been declared such by the magisterium and its value in scriptural interpretation has been especially stressed. Application of the principle is difficult, at least at a certain level. In regard to individual texts of Scripture total patristic consensus is rare...One example: the interpretation of Peter’s confession in Matthew 16:16-18. Except at Rome, this passage was not applied by the Fathers to the papal primacy; they worked out an exegesis at the level of their own ecclesiological thought, more anthropological and spiritual than juridical. — Yves M.-J. Congar, O.P., p. 71

And Catholic archbishop Peter Richard Kenrick (1806-1896), while yet seeking to support Peter as the rock, stated that,

“If we are bound to follow the majority of the fathers in this thing, then we are bound to hold for certain that by the rock should be understood the faith professed by Peter, not Peter professing the faith.” — Speech of archbishop Kenkick, p. 109; An inside view of the vatican council, edited by Leonard Woolsey Bacon.

Your own CCC allows the interpretation that, “On the rock of this faith confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,” (pt. 1, sec. 2, cp. 2, para. 424), for some of the ancients (for what their opinion is worth) provided for this or other interpretations.

• Ambrosiaster [who elsewhere upholds Peter as being the chief apostle to whom the Lord had entrusted the care of the Church, but not superior to Paul as an apostle except in time], Eph. 2:20:

Wherefore the Lord says to Peter: 'Upon this rock I shall build my Church,' that is, upon this confession of the catholic faith I shall establish the faithful in life. — Ambrosiaster, Commentaries on Galatians—Philemon, Eph. 2:20; Gerald L. Bray, p. 42

• Augustine, sermon:

"Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. — John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine , © 1993 New City Press, Sermons, Vol III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327

Upon this rock, said the Lord, I will build my Church. Upon this confession, upon this that you said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer her (Mt. 16:18). — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 236A.3, p. 48.

• Augustine, sermon:

For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, 'On this rock will I build my Church,' because Peter had said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. — Augustine Tractate CXXIV; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, Volume VII Tractate CXXIV (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.cxxv.html)

• Augustine, sermon:

And Peter, one speaking for the rest of them, one for all, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:15-16)...And I tell you: you are Peter; because I am the rock, you are Rocky, Peter-I mean, rock doesn't come from Rocky, but Rocky from rock, just as Christ doesn't come from Christian, but Christian from Christ; and upon this rock I will build my Church (Mt 16:17-18); not upon Peter, or Rocky, which is what you are, but upon the rock which you have confessed. I will build my Church though; I will build you, because in this answer of yours you represent the Church. — John Rotelle, O.S.A. Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 270.2, p. 289

• Augustine, sermon:

Peter had already said to him, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' He had already heard, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not conquer her' (Mt 16:16-18)...Christ himself was the rock, while Peter, Rocky, was only named from the rock. That's why the rock rose again, to make Peter solid and strong; because Peter would have perished, if the rock hadn't lived. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 244.1, p. 95

• Augustine, sermon:

...because on this rock, he said, I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not overcome it (Mt. 16:18). Now the rock was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Was it Paul that was crucified for you? Hold on to these texts, love these texts, repeat them in a fraternal and peaceful manner. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1995), Sermons, Volume III/10, Sermon 358.5, p. 193

• Augustine, Psalm LXI:

Let us call to mind the Gospel: 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church.' Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to build upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: 'But the Rock was Christ.' On Him therefore builded we have been. — Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VIII, Saint Augustin, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm LXI.3, p. 249. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.LXI.html)

• Augustine, in “Retractions,”

In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. — The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1:.

• Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:

'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.

• Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:

You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].

• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:

'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455

• Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:

Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)

• Cyril of Alexandria:

When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.

• Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):

“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'

“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)

• Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II): Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.

Answer by Matthew Bunson on 10-15-2002: While at times an interesting work on the cultural environment and traditions of the Church, in my opinion the work lacks sufficient doctrinal clarity. Particularly notable is its lack of theological depth in the area of the sacraments. This is perhaps due to the effort -- no doubt sincere -- to present the work as a popular resource. As a consequence, I would suggest disregarding the book's declarations regarding your questions. It is useful to remember that not every book written about the Church provides reliable information, but parishes and individuals purchase many books simply because they are available, fill some perceived hole in a library, or have attractive covers and interesting titles (one would be surprised how well bad books do with a pleasing presentation).

He did not deny it did he? He danced around it but never touched the core .... that is the way Rome works.. If he could have refuted it he would have...

He knows in the early Roman Catholic church that the pastors were call clerks not priests.. Jesus was the final priest

You can believe as you choose of course.. but think about needing a priest to resacrifice Christ over and over.. Good Friday just does not do it