Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Irisshlass
The early church was catholic and has stood for 2000 years..

Yes, but not Catholic in the sense that you know Catholicism today. If you studied up a bit you would be shocked at the contrasts in beliefs between the early Church Fathers and today's Catholic teachings.

326 posted on 11/01/2002 8:11:02 PM PST by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies ]


To: DallasMike
you would be shocked at the contrasts in beliefs between the early Church Fathers and today's Catholic teachings

oh really?? what differences are you referring to...and any particular father?
328 posted on 11/01/2002 8:19:33 PM PST by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies ]

To: DallasMike
If you studied up a bit you would be shocked at the contrasts in beliefs between the early Church Fathers and today's Catholic teachings.

You mean, like the way that Ignatius of Antioch says that one ought not even to speak of the heretics who deny that the Eucharist is truly Christ's flesh?

Or,do you mean the way that Irenaeus says that the one way all men may know that they hold to the Apostolic tradition is by following the faith of the See of Rome?

Or, do you mean the way that various fathers testified to the apostolicity of the practice of infant baptism, some of them saying flatly that the Apostles instituted the practice?

Or, do you mean the way that Origen cousels people on how to pick a good confessor?

Or, do you mean the way that the council fathers of Chalcedon cried out "This is what we all believe! This is the Apostolic faith! Peter has spoken through Leo!" when the Pope's legates read his proclamation?

Or, do you mean the way everyone from the Didache on affirms that the Divine Liturgy is a true sacrifice because it is mystically connected to the Cross?

Or, do you mean the way Clement of Rome demands obedience to his letter, although John the Apostle was almost certainly still alive.

Or, do you mean the way Augustine specifically exempts the Blessed Virgin from any discussion of original sin?

Or, do you mean the way Epiphanius of Salamis said that only Christ and his mother utterly pure and without the stain of sin.

Or, do you mean the way that Jerome rejected Helvidius using words he never, ever used toward those who accepted the deuterocanonicals.

Or, do you mean the way that various fathers (the list is a long one) endorse baptismal regeneration?

I don't find any of those shocking. I do find it shocking that you claim to know the fathers and don't know how completely they would reject anything resembling evangelical Protestantism.

332 posted on 11/01/2002 8:37:30 PM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson