Posted on 06/07/2007 4:07:42 AM PDT by markomalley
You already know the answer to that.
And, if common sense prevails, you also know that the Acts were written by Luke, a gentile convert who accompanied Paul after Paul's visit to Troas. So there would likely be no need for its inclusion. The Book of Acts also does not include the acts of Andrew, Thomas, or most of the other apostles.
Oh, and by the way, it's not my Magesterium, it's the Church's Magesterium. As a Christian, it's my obligation to accept that Magesterium, but whether or not I do so, it is still there and still valid.
I agree wholeheartedly and that was the reason for posting the article: to try to encourage my fellow Christians of the Latin Rite to study their scriptures so that they could follow them more and not allow schismatics to enrage them needlessly. It only encourages the schismatics and does not serve God.
And God used an ass to communicate his message to Balaam.
Does the ass get credit for the work of God?
Uncle Chip,
Can you show me where exactly it is part of the magisterium that Peter was the “first bishop of Rome”? I’m just curious.
Also, according to Catholic Answers (since I don’t have the books with me at work):
“William A. Jurgens, in his three-volume set The Faith of the Early Fathers, a masterly compendium that cites at length everything from the Didache to John Damascene, includes thirty references to this question, divided, in the index, about evenly between the statements that “Peter came to Rome and died there” and that “Peter established his See at Rome and made the bishop of Rome his successor in the primacy.” A few examples must suffice, but they and other early references demonstrate that there can be no question that the universal—and very early—position (one hesitates to use the word “tradition,” since some people read that as “legend”) was that Peter certainly did end up in the capital of the Empire.”
You know that isn't true.
-A8
No, I don’t.
You should then.
Not the capital "c"'s in Catholic and Church --- but you know that, right??? The "Catholic Church" was an invertion of Constantine in the 4th century. Those are the historical facts at odds with your hysterical myths.
Define flaming, because from my perspective disagreement with Catholic doctrine or practice gets labeled as "Catholic bashing".
Check your dictionary. For examples of their useage, check the article or RCC propaganda for voluminous useage of such.
1 Peter 5:13:
The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.
Babylon is where, according to Revelations 17-18?
Not My Church, or My people, but ME.
Jesus equates Himself with His Church which is founded on Apostolic Succession
Is that the original text or an altered copy made by a dishonest copyist of later centuries that even the magisterium of your own church now admits happened to a lot of Ignatius' writings???
LOL..oy vey... this canard again. Uncle Chip, I dunno where you got this "fact", but it is pure and simple BS, and it harms rather than helps your case.
Show me one, ONE primary source document from the 4th century that supports this claim. Or 5th century. Or 6th century. Where can I find this reported Eusebius? Sozemen? Take your pick of Late Roman historians, and find me one that says anything like this at all.
This nonsense about Constantine and paganization of the Church is *made up*. It never happened. Ask any serious historian of the period.
Bashing Catholics is another way to flame a poster because of the poster being RC.
When you say "the early Catholics", should that not be "the early Christians"? To do less would be to upset many others and that would negate your statement of, "to understand the Holy Scriptures so that we can patiently work with those who have had their eyes blinded (cf Jn 12:40) in the hopes that God will reveal His light to them.
Your statement sounds wonderful to a Catholic but how would you react to, We Protestants must patiently work with those Catholics who have been blinded from the truth by their church and pray that God will reveal His truth to them?
Would your eyes be opened to what I was telling you or be flaming red with indignation?
IOW, we must agree with everything your Church puts out or we are flaming y'all.
How can I when Catholics often insist that the Church IS God?
By the way, I have always liked your tag line. Contains some good advice for all to follow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.