Peter & Succession (Understanding the Church Today)

Ignatius Insight ^ | 2005 | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

[Uncle Chip]

Does that mean that only his early writings are accepted as part of their Tradition, and his later writings excluded?

[wmfights]

For information sake, where in Athanasius' writings does he provide a list of the books?
____________________________________

St. Athansius wrote in his 39th Festal letter in 367 AD to the churches he was Bishop of in Egypt. Prior to this Eusebius compiled a list, but he had no authority behind it and he only listed the books that "should be read". It was Athansius who acted with authority for Egypt and gave a list that "in these alone the teaching of Godliness is proclaimed". Augustine followed about 30 years later at the Synod of Hippo where the exact same grouping of books and order was declared the Canon.

All of this occurred outside of Rome. Eusebius was the Bishop in Palestine. Athansius was the Bishop in Eygpt. Augustine was the Bishop in Algeria. A book I found helpful when looking into this was Lost Christianities by Bart Ehrman. It is well researched and footnoted.

[wmfights]

"Does that mean that only his early writings are accepted as part of their Tradition, and his later writings excluded?"
________________________

I don't know. I suspect that once he was considered outside the RCC his writings were ignored. Maybe one of the RC posters, who's familiar with the era, can explain the why's and where for's.

[AlaninSA]

You're not identifying a church's identity by saying that it's a "Bible" church. That "affiliation" is simply too vague - and varies greatly depending on the ego, wallet and attitude of the "pastor."

Come on, be honest.

As if we Catholics hide our teachings. The entire catechism of the Catholic Church is available at http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM - and the approved translation of the Bible for Catholic Americans is located at http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/ -- all right out in the open.

Your obvious fear of the Catholic church is at the same time amusing and disturbing.

[Silly]

Can someone please explain to me why some Catholics insist on preaching Peter and Rome instead of Jesus and his Gospel?

(By the way, calling the above article propaganda is not an insult, it is at minimum someone's thoughtful opinion, and may also, in fact, be the truth. These threads are open to anyone who wishes to join the discourse. Sorry of you disagree, but that doesn't make it hate speech.)

Articles like this have an agenda, which is to justify someone's set of beliefs and set out to provide proofs that they are correct, and that other views are wrong.

Not picking on Catholics, by the way -- a lot of sects do the same thing... We're the REAL Christians, our way is the BEST way, we have a SPECIAL claim to truth, tradition, doctrine, etc. that YOU don't have.

I would like to see more Christians on FreeRepublic preach Jesus and his gospel, instead of re-posting other people's scholarship and regurgitated, long-winded volumes on doctrines of secondary or no importance.

There is a world out there to be redeemed, loved, saved and rescued from hell. The real followers of Jesus are out there doing his work. The others are arguing about doctrine and trying to prove that they're right.

"If Jesus came back and saw what's going on in His name, He'd never stop throwing up." -- from Hannah and Her Sisters

[kerryusama04]

Acts 17:10-11 also state the the NT Evangelists did not conradict the OT, IMO. That is an important facet to my personal faith.

Another point is that the sciptures we hold today, from Genesis to Revelation, all agree. This shows me that the Holy Spirit - not men - is responsible for this work.

[Uncle Chip]

I'm sorry if you don't get it, but that's your problem not mine.

BTW "Running On Empty" says that I'm being mean to you. Did she tattle on me to the hall monitor? Is that how debates are handled on a Catholic Forum? I thought people on Free Republic were grownups, or is that just on non-Catholic forums.

[wmfights]

"Another point is that the sciptures we hold today, from Genesis to Revelation, all agree. This shows me that the Holy Spirit - not men - is responsible for this work."
______________________

I completely agree.

I think most people don't know how many forgeries, uninspired books, and different sects existed from the time the Apostolic era ended and the rise of Roman Catholicism as the state religion around 400 AD. In that environment the Canon that emerged can only be explained by the intervention of the Holy Spirit. I don't know of any great arguments that the books of the New Testament are not inspired. But I think the historical record shows the Canon was not formed by the RCC.

[big'ol_freeper]

...Jesuits and the Opus Dei are filled with illuminati elements...

Time to get out the tin foil cap I am guessing

[Uncle Chip]

"Another point is that the sciptures we hold today, from Genesis to Revelation, all agree. This shows me that the Holy Spirit - not men - is responsible for this work."

----- Aaaaaammmmmmmeeeeeeeennnnnnnnn !!!!!!! And that is why they should be valued above the writings of anyone else, be they 2nd century patriarch, 4th century prelate, 10th century bishop, 12 century pope, 16th century reformer, or present day magisterium.

[adiaireton8]

Can someone please explain to me why some Catholics insist on preaching Peter and Rome instead of Jesus and his Gospel?

First explain why you see the two as mutually exclusive.

-A8

[bornacatholic]

between the 2nd and 6th centuries, in Egypt alone, there were several vernacular Bibels in use. The SCriptures were tarnslated into Coptic and its derivative dialects, Sahidic, Boharic, Fayumic, and Subachmimic. All this BEFORE the end of the age of Patristics. Scriptures in greek, scriptures in the Gothic of Ulfilas and the scriptures oin slavonic LONG predated your boy luther

[GAB-1955]

We are one in faith in Christ Jesus. However the Church Universal is not the same thing as the Roman Catholic Church. In the Church Universal are Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants, among others. Faith in Christ Jesus is our foundation. Catholic doctrine believes that we non-Catholics who have faith but suffer "invincible ignorance" are united to the Catholic faith by desire. There is only one Bride of Christ. It is not based in Rome alone.

I don't see how you can say that the Reformers separated from Rome out of ego. It was not personal vanity that led Luther, Calvin, Zwlingli, Hus, and others, except save in the case of the Anglicans. Yes, these men had strong personalities, but if they did not sincerely believe in the Protestant solas, they would have been successful Catholic priests and bishops. Yet their zeal was for the Gospel of Christ, despite their laws.

Corrupted by Rome? I will state that the doctrine of justification by faith alone was corrupted from Augustine's day, for example. Furthermore, the reliance on Tradition as a source coequal with Scripture was erroneous. Tradition is valuable, but it cannot replace the supremacy of Scripture.

[Silly]

I'm not saying they're mutually exclusive. I'm saying that preaching Jesus and his gospel (and demonstrating it) is absolutely vital and primary for people to be saved -- our primary concern.

Peter and Rome is a diversion, not worth the time at best, and at worst it will completely eclipse Jesus.

I know many, many people who have left the catholic church because they finally heard the gospel for the first time. None of them joined perfect denominations, and none of them have absolutely perfect doctrine in complete detail, but they finally understood what the gospel is all about, and why we need Jesus, and their understanding and their lives have been utterly transformed.

[D Rider]

That the primacy of Peter is recognizable in all the major strands of the New Testament is incontestable.

You lost me there. It is contestable. Let alone the role of the Roman church, the taking of the tile of Pontiff from the Caesars,...etc. And should we examine the putrid history of the majority of Popes with its intrigues, murders and debauchery... etc. Sorry, Christians need to be in the body of Christ not in the Roman Church.

[Uncle Chip]

------ and they long predated the founding of the Roman Catholic Church, Jerome, the Latin Vulgate. You are correct.

[AlaninSA]

I've no idea what you're talking about.

Perhaps you joined FR to be obnoxious. Once you've been here more than 22 days...perhaps you'll learn to be less of a confrontational and rude poster on threads not pertaining to the cult to which you belong.

[Uncle Chip]

"I've no idea what you're talking about."

----- That's the first thing that you have posted that I can agree with.

[bornacatholic]

St. Ignatius, 180 AD Against HeresiesThe truth is to be found nowhere else but in the Catholic Church, the sole depository of apostolical doctrine. Heresies are of recent formation, and cannot trace their origin up to the apostles.

*You are new to FR. Your arguement is 20 centuries old

[Uncle Chip]

---- and Ignatius was not referring to the Roman Catholic Church there. Check your dates.