Posted on 10/27/2011 4:05:56 PM PDT by rzman21
I challenge Evangelicals to put their interpretation of the Bible and their theology up against the acid test of what the Early Church Fathers taught.
Perhaps, Evangelicalism is closer to the truth than Mormonism, but it still has a long way to go.
Purpose
This Web page is dedicated to the defense of Catholic doctrines within Patristic thought. The Catholic rule of faith consists of three coordinate and complementary authorities: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the teaching Church. The Church Fathers used both Scripture and Tradition to explain and defend the Catholic faith. Corunum's mission is to present the outline of Catholic doctrines as they appear in the writings of the Church Fathers.
What you will Find Inside
Corunum Apologetic Web site does not contain a library of the writings of the Church Fathers. There are a host of sites on the internet which offer the Ante-Nicene Fathers(ANF) edited by Cleveland Coxe and the Nicene Post-Nicene Fathers(NPNF) edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace.(cf. ANF/NPNF ). Inside you will find testimony from the Church Fathers on various Catholic doctrines listed in chronological order.
"See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(A.D. 110),in ANF,I:89
Taught by St. Peter the Apostle
Against schism:
"Why are there strifes, and tumults, and divisions, and schisms, and wars among you? Have we not [all] one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ? Why do we divide and tear to pieces the members of Christ, and raise up strife against our own body, and have reached such a height of madness as to forget that "we are members one of another?" Remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, how He said, "Woe to that man [by whom offences come]! It were better for him that he had never been born, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of my elect. Yea, it were better for him that a millstone should be hung about [his neck], and he should be sunk in the depths of the sea, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of my little ones. 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 continueth." Clement of Rome[regn c.A.D. 91-101],To the Corinthians,46(A.D. 91),in ANF,I:17-18
Taught by St. Peter the Apostle
"And some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.'"
Acts 15:5 -
"But certain ones of the sect of the Parisees who had believed, stood up, saying, 'It is necessary to circumcise them, and to direct thme to observe the Law of Moses.'"
Your friends are in the same league as these folks from 51AD. Anyone can misunderstood the Gospel. Notice, these men were even called believers, an appelation I'm not sure I would give to each of the men on your list. That your group speaks in error is not surprising, their sincerity notwithstanding.
The "Eucharist" is a blasphemous denial of the once and for all death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ by people who openly crucify him, anew. Tragic, but completely expected.
Can’t answer the question? He does not have the same flesh and blood body He had on earth. So which do you “transubstantiate”?
what’s ironic is anyone who denies the Real Presence in the Eucharist would not fellowship or worship with Tertullian, Origen or Clement and they would have considered such people heretics, outside the Faith.
today we have a much more “liberal” understanding of who is a Christian, with 30,000 denominations all claiming to be the “Church”. back in the second and third century, there was only the Universal Church.
I’ll ask you the same question. Is the “flesh” of the Eucharist Jesus earthly flesh or the “flesh” of His transfigured body?
when does the RCC supposedly teach that Jesus “dies again” in the Mass?
when the Eucharist is received, is Jesus dead or alive?
when in the Mass does Jesus rise from the dead, if He was dead at some point earlier?
who kills Jesus in the Mass?
you seem to think you have a good understanding of what “my group” teaches, i’d like to learn what you know.
this should be good.
Why not answer the question? Either it’s the earthly flesh or the “flesh” of the transfigured Jesus. Of course you have a serious problem because “mortal flesh” cannot enter heaven and if you say transfigured “flesh” for some odd reason you have a more serious problem it seems. Either you deny His resurrection and transfiguration and put Him back into His mortal flesh or …….?
BTTT
Pope St. Gregory the Great, Dial. IV,58:
Although He (Christ) who rose from the dead shall die no more - death no longer has power over Him - still, although He is immortal and His living form incorruptible, He is being slaughtered for us in this mysterium of the holy sacrifice. Because there His body provides nourishment, His flesh being divided up, His blood pours out - no longer into the hands of non-believers, but into the mouths of believers.
“although He rose from the dead shall die no more.....”
it appears you know more about the RCC doctrine than Gregory!!
see post #160. is Jesus capable in His resurrected Body of walking thru walls? again, there is only one Jesus, true God and true man.
Colossians 1:27 says Christ in you the hope of glory.
is Christ in believers or not?
My FRiend, perhaps you have already been told this rather obvious observation, but your question is not legitimate. Under your logic (or the logic you have been taught by some theologian), I cannot prove that Mary was not a skateboarder, or John the Baptist did not belong to the First Baptist Church of Jerusalem, Peter was not lead guitar in the Rock of Ages band, and Paul did not secretly have a crush on Mary Magdanlene.
Proper interpretive technique (good hermeneutics) asks the Scriptures to inform us, we don't use them to proof our own presuppostions. We listen to the argument of the authors, not use their texts to support our traditional conclusions. Start over and read the story through. You will find there is no Roman organization, no purgatory, no indulgences, no sacerdotalism, no papalism, no Mariolatry, no goofy ceremonies, no rituals, no anything concocted by Rome. This is all baggage the darkness uses to distract you from the One central figure, Jesus the Messiah.
If you have not, throw yourself upon Him, turn from this train wreck called Rome and come into the light of Christ, alone...if you can.
see post #165
So you would say He is still in the earthly flesh as He was while walking here on earth since is “only one Jesus, true God and true man”? There was no change from His earthly flesh to His heavenly body?
Well, you provided this monstrosity of a quote. Read it carefully and compare it to your question.
"when does the RCC supposedly teach that Jesus “dies again” in the Mass?"
"Pope St. Gregory the Great, Dial. IV,58:
Although He (Christ) who rose from the dead shall die no more - death no longer has power over Him - still, although He is immortal and His living form incorruptible, He is being
slaughtered for us in this mysterium of the holy sacrifice. Because there His body provides nourishment, His flesh being divided up, His blood pours out
- no longer into the hands of non-believers, but into the mouths of believers."
Read it carefully.
four simple questions, anyone who knows what the RCC organization teaches should easily be able to answer all of them. we will see if the charges made can be backed up, or if someone is bearing false witness.
Jesus has a resurrected, glorified body. He is still true God and true man and will be forever.
In the Protestant case, it’s invent your own religion.
Really? So what was the Council of Trent if not a wholesale rewriting of doctrine including saint and relic worship, indulgences, elevating speculative "Tradition" to the Authority of Apostolic Scripture and moving Mary into the circle of the Godhead?
I submit the Council of Trent is where the Roman Catholic Church made its official divorce from orthodox Christianity and into a realm of its own self-supporting religious system.
The “Eucharist” is a blasphemous denial of the once and for all death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ by people who openly crucify him, anew. Tragic, but completely expected.
based on your statement above, please answer my 4 questions or retract this absurd statement.
They can not see that ... in part because they do not know the gospel
#165 remains unanswered.
for those who are not Catholic, stay tuned to see if the charge can be backed up.................
We he believes that they ate the ACTUAL REAL FLESH OF THE HUMAN BODY OF CHRIST ..at the last supper.. and He even chewed on Himself a bit.. so you are not likely to get an answer to that question either..
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.