[Claud]

Oh really? So where does Irenaeus get off saying that it is a matter of necessity...necessity...that all churches everywhere agree with the Church of Rome. Irenaeus who was never a Roman pontiff but just a lowly bishop of Gaul in around A.D. 170.

A dupe of Zephyrinus and Callixtus, was he? A Monarchian modalist was he?

[Risky-Riskerdo]

So where does Irenaeus get off saying that it is a matter of necessity...necessity...that all churches everywhere agree with the Church of Rome.

The CONTEXT of Irenaeus comment was in opposition to the heretics he was addressing, and AT THAT TIME, the bishop of Rome was standing for orthodox doctrine. Irenaeus was NOT saying that everyone be submissive to the bishop of Rome as the exclusive, supreme ruler of the universal church at all. Rome has twisted Irenaeus to fit it's later claims of exclusive supremacy. It had a historical context exclusive to that time, and meant that the orthodoxy defended in Rome at that time was to be followed. Irenaeus never meant that the bishop of Rome was to be the supreme ruler, to whom everyone at all times in history are to submit to no matter what.

[Risky-Riskerdo]

A dupe of Zephyrinus and Callixtus, was he? A Monarchian modalist was he?

Your inability to restrain yourself is leading you into making ridiculous comments.

[George W. Bush]

So where does Irenaeus get off saying that it is a matter of necessity...necessity...that all churches everywhere agree with the Church of Rome. Irenaeus who was never a Roman pontiff but just a lowly bishop of Gaul in around A.D. 170.

Since Irenaeus was not a pope (since such cannot exist), the argument that the bishop of Rome is a pope is strictly non sequitur (aha, you probably didn't expect that I know how sprinkling some Latin makes you guys go all cow-eyed for some reason).

Irenaeus instructing his priests and deacons to be in agreement with Rome's policy in the disputes of the day does not establish an eternal and binding claim to the supremacy of Rome's bishop in all matters and his elevation as the spiritual dictator of all mankind.

One would think some of you would finally tire of this medieval totalitarian religion despite its pretty rituals and arts. In all of the Christian era, Rome's remains the only exercise of organized religion in the West which is comparable to that of militant Islam who is still quite enthused over chopping off body parts, public massacres, torture, etc. Say, you don't suppose you could license your patents for public burnings at the stake to them? Sounds lucrative.