Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
A collection of ancient ecclesiastical decrees (eighty-five in the Eastern, fifty in the Western Church) concerning the government and discipline of the Christian Church, incorporated with the Apostolic Constitutions (VIII, 47). They deal mostly with the office and duties of a Christian bishop, the qualifications and conduct of the clergy, the religious life of the Christian flock (abstinence, fasting), its external administration (excommunucation, synods, relations with pagans and Jews), the sacraments (Baptism, Eucharist, Marriage); in a word, they are a handy summary of the statutory legislation of the primitive Church.
You seem to be confusing the authorship of the books -- unknown, -- with whether they reflect the legal environment of the Early Church, -- they do.
In the original Greek text they claim to be the very legislation of the Apostles themselves, at least as promulgated by their great disciple, Clement. Nevertheless, though a venerable mirror of ancient Christian life and blameless in doctrine, their claim to genuine Apostolic origin is quite false and untenable.
Apostolic Canons
If you have difficulty in understang the meaning of "false and untenable" I can't help you.
You seem to be confusing the authorship of the books -- unknown, -- with whether they reflect the legal environment of the Early Church, -- they do.
I am confusing nothing nor, I suspect, do you. If you wish to keep pushing a forgery as "truth" be my guest. Just don't push it off on me.
In the original Greek text they claim to be the very legislation of the Apostles themselves, at least as promulgated by their great disciple, Clement. Nevertheless, though a venerable mirror of ancient Christian life and blameless in doctrine, their claim to genuine Apostolic origin is quite false and untenable.
Apostolic Canons
If you have difficulty in understang the meaning of "false and untenable" I can't help you.
lol. AMEN!, Old Reggie. Thank you for taking the time to read the link offered and prove, from that very link, that the "Apostolic Canons" are forgeries.
I know, — this is why I did not insist on them originating from the apostles. I posted them as an illustration of the legal environment of the Early Church relevant to your assertion that one bishop coudl write a “pastoral” letter telling another bishop what to do in his diocese.
Please read the above statement and imagine ii in bold, red, and big letters if it helps. It is tiresome to repeat everything several times to you before it sinks in.
The bottom line is that your own evidence says the Apostolic Canons are fabrications. Bogus. Fiction. Contrivance.
God’s word tells us Scripture is sufficient and “able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Men who go looking for truth outside the Scriptures inevitably stumble on the doctrines of men.
OK, I imagined your words to be in bold, red ink, and big letters and I find it to be a big, bold, red, falsehood.
Let's look here: (7319)
The Apostolic Constitutions claims to be directly from the apostles. Therefore, the entire book is fictional and phony, contrary to your claim "There is nothing phony or fictional in it."
No it doesn't. It says the attribution is wrong. The content accurately reflects the legal environment of the Early Church.
Nor is that the bottom line. The bottom line is the laughable assertion by OldReggie that the Early Church did not have canon law, and before that, the equally ignorant claim that it was common practice for one bishop to tell another what to do in his dioocese "pastorally".
There is no "therefore". Problems with attribution are common to the patristic legacy. Authors rarely stated their authorship; the attribution of the synoptic gospels, for example, is done from tradition. The author of several letters of St.Paul might actually be someone other than St. Paul; the author of the Protoevangelium of St. James is most likely not St. James It is possible that the Liturgy of St. James is likewise an incorrect attribution. We have the voluminous writings of St. Jerome and also of Pseudo-Jerome, of St. John Chrysostom and Pseudo Chrysostom. No originals of these works survive; copyists inserted attributions according to who they believed the author was. It was normal practice, -- the Christian history did not start with the forgery of Romans 3:28 by Luther (now that was really a forgery, the bastard knew very well what he was doing). I believe I explained that to you already a number of times, but of course if you should fail to retain it, I will explain it again.
It actually says "false and untenable...". Spin it any which way and your claim is still false.
Nor is that the bottom line. The bottom line is the laughable assertion by OldReggie that the Early Church did not have canon law, and before that, the equally ignorant claim that it was common practice for one bishop to tell another what to do in his dioocese "pastorally".
Twisting what I said is one thing. an outright lie is another "... and before that, the equally ignorant claim that it was common practice for one bishop to tell another what to do in his dioocese "pastorally." is another.
The case is closed.
false and untenable
The attribution to the Apostles as actual writers is "false and untenable". The work itself is "a venerable mirror of ancient Christian life and blameless in doctrine" and "a handy summary of the statutory legislation of the primitive Church". Learn to read.
outright lie
it was a pastoral letter from one equal church to another, viz "The church of God which sojourns at Rome" to "the church of God sojourning at Corinth. (Reggie 7189)There was no Canon Law in the early Church! (Reggie 7293)
I, alone, am the one who decides to "close the case" with one who deliberately distorts and/or outright lies about what I have said.
I expect and accept the "spin doctor" routine but I don't accept deliberate lies.
Case closed!
I quoted what you said. If I misunderstood what you meant, you can explain yourself better, if you so choose.
Please refer to my post #7329 where I accused you of a deliberate fabrication in your post #3927.
(Quote) Twisting what I said is one thing. an outright lie is another "... and before that, the equally ignorant claim that it was common practice for one bishop to tell another what to do in his dioocese "pastorally." is another.
If you can show where I made such a claim I will apologize. Certainly it wouldn't be the first mistake I ever made. On the other hand, I expect an apology is in order if the charge, by you, is false.
In 7189 you said that “it was a pastoral letter from one equal church to another, viz “The church of God which sojourns at Rome” to “the church of God sojourning at Corinth”. My point was that it was a legal impossibility. Then the conversation sidetracked into whether or not the Early Church had canon law. Indeed I exagerrated when I said “common practice”. But you did suggest that a bishop could teach another bishop, did you not?
"But you did suggest that a bishop could teach another bishop, did you not?"
No; however, I will categorically state that a bishop could teach another bishop. Hell, I can teach a bishop a thing or two.
I would appreciate it greatly if you could send me a link to the Canon Law in effect in the 4th or 5th century. Be advised that a reference to a known piece of fiction is of no account.
The following link may be helpful in determining when Canon Law was developed: Canon Law
He can, and you can, but not legally. The Letter of Clement was, on the other hand, studied in the Early Church -- to the point of being considered a part of the inspired scripture. No one raised an objection that is was against the canon.
Your link is good in studying the history of Canon Law. From it we (maybe not you personally but competent readers in general) learn, for example,
Until the Church began to enjoy peace, the written canon law was very meagre; after making full allowance for the documents that must have perished, we can discover only a fragmentary law, made as circumstances demanded, and devoid of all system. Unity of legislation, in as far as it can be expected at that period, is identical with a certain uniformity of practice, based on the prescriptions of Divine law relative to the constitution of the Church, the liturgy, the sacraments, etc. The clergy, organized everywhere in the same way, exercised almost everywhere the same functions. But at an early period we discover a greater local disciplinary uniformity between the Churches of the great sees (Rome, Carthage, Alexandria, Antioch, later Constantinople) and the Churches depending immediately on them. Further it is the disciplinary decisions of the bishops of the various regions that form the first nucleus of local canon law; these texts, spreading gradually from one country to another by means of the collections, obtain universal dissemination and in this way are the basis of general canon law.There were, however, in the East, from the early days up to the end of the fifth century, certain writings, closely related to each other, and which were in reality brief canon law treatises on ecclesiastical administration the duties of the clergy and the faithful, and especially on the liturgy. We refer to works attributed to the Apostles, very popular in the Oriental Churches, though devoid of official authority, and which may be called pseudo-epigraphic, rather than apocryphal. The principal writings of this kind are the "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles" or "Didache", the "Didascalia", based on the "Didache"; the "Apostolic Constitutions", an expansion of the two preceding works; then the "Apostolic Church Ordinance", the "Definitio canonica SS. Apostolorum", the "Testament of the Lord" and the "Octateuch of Clement"; lastly the "Apostolic Canons". Of all this literature, only the "Apostolic Canons" were included in the canonical collections of the Greek Church. The most important of these documents the "Apostolic Constitutions", was removed by the Second Canon of the Council in Trullo (692), as having been interpolated by the heretics. As to the eighty-five Apostolic Canons, accepted by the same council, they rank yet first in the above-mentioned "Apostolic" collection; the first fifty translated into Latin by Dionysius Exiguus (c. 500), were included in the Western collections and afterwards in the "Corpus Juris".
Canonical collections in the East
a known piece of fiction
Sorry to go back to this, but if you are referring to the Apostolic Constitutions, it is a falsely attributed text which, however, does reflect the legal environment of the time, and its canons are a part of the contemporary Canon Law. It is mentioned in the above excerpt as such. As one can see, it was later incorporated in the "Corpus Juris".
Nor is your other assertion (7,287), that St. Clement is not telling the Corinthians what to do, is correct. He accuses the bishops of Corinth directly:
Your schism has subverted [the faith of] many, has discouraged many, has given rise to doubt in many, and has caused grief to us all. And still your sedition continues (46)
Then he urges them to reconcile and acknowledge their transgression
Let us therefore, with all haste, put an end to this (48)Let us therefore implore forgiveness for all those transgressions which through any [suggestion] of the adversary we have committed. And these who have been the leaders of sedition and disagreement ought to have respect to the common hope. For such as live in fear and love would rather that they themselves than their neighbours should be involved in suffering. And they prefer to bear blame themselves, rather than that the concord which has been well and piously handed down to us should suffer. For it is better that a man should acknowledge his transgressions than that he should harden his heart (51)
Those guilty of the sedition should lose their office and submit to the faithful presbyters:
Who then among you is noble-minded? Who compassionate? Who full of love? Let him declare, “If on my account sedition and disagreement and schisms have arisen, I will depart, I will go away wherever ye desire, and I will do whatever the majority commands; only let the flock of Christ live on terms of peace with the presbyters set over it.” (54)You therefore, who laid the foundation of this sedition, submit yourselves to the presbyters, and receive correction so as to repent, bending the knees of your hearts. Learn to be subject, laying aside the proud and arrogant self-confidence of your tongue. (57)
The execution of this directive is to be reported back:
Send back speedily to us in peace and with joy these our messengers to you: Claudius Ephebus and Valerius Bito, with Fortunatus; that they may the sooner announce to us the peace and harmony we so earnestly desire and long for [among you], and that we may the more quickly rejoice over the good order re-established among you. (65)
Rather snarky isn't it? Goodby.
When they lose, all they have left is snark.
It was fun. Thanks.
LOL. Amen!
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.