No, but it does not attempt to present the full theology that is beyong the grasp of children and certain obtuse alleged ex-Catholics. (When I see the street sign "Slow Children Playing" I somehow always think of you two).
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
Thanks...
Nah. I won’t ask you the same question as we all know the answer, yes?
So, then, it looks like the Baltimore Catechism is LYING to all those Catholic children.
Who??? Oh, Cassius Clay...
Nah, your group’s profiteering.
Excellent question, RnMomof7.
Maybe it was, to use the term the Apostle Paul used, “bread.”
Let us taste and see that the Lord is good.
Yes, we are,...in the fruit of the Spirit.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I’m a convert, via RCIA. Converted late in life and was a member of or attended Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, Church of Christ and Presbyterian over many years.
This is in the South, deep Bible Belt, mostly Baptist territory. I heard the basics of solas versus non solas; but, never anything like the slanders on these threads. I’m currently involved in a multi-year theological seminar with other Catholics and Protestants (Catholics in the minority.) I love the discussions and the people in the group with whom I’ve become very close.
I remain convinced we’re in this forum box with a very unrepresentative sample of Protestant thinking, thankfully.
Roman Catholics on this discussion started the vitriol. They came looking for a fight. It’s as though they are more motivated to slam their RC doctrines against those of other denominations than to promote Jesus.
No, but it does not attempt to present the full theology that is beyong the grasp of children and certain obtuse alleged ex-Catholics. (When I see the street sign "Slow Children Playing" I somehow always think of you two).
My apologies if my post is misconstrued as personal. On the contrary my wordsmithing was chosen to avoid being personal, yet still express a simple observation for what would otherwise might be perceived as absurd logic by others attempting to read the mind of the authors, but not familiar with their postings.
Posts 387 and 388, though are outstanding examples of outrageous statements.
Both authors/subjects of their writings are lucid writers and express their meanings fairly well.
The debate, though, has reasons for its presence.
The one being personally attacked as a ‘group member’ has well demonstrated his belief in Christ, the Cross, and the Resurrection. The other has been well read enough to well understand that point, but has made demonstrative statements to the opposite, even adversarially.
I don’t presume the authors to be an idiot, not accuse them of such, but do find there are reasons for people’s behavior and their thinking.
I find posts 387 and 388 to be examples of the meanings expressed in 1John 3:13. I perceive spiritual drivers for those assaults, not mental rationale.
Um, how is this comment not a personal attack?
My, how Roman Catholics choose to express themselves ... with the graciousness of Christ?
I wasn’t talking to you. I was referring to the non-Christian cult created by Mohammed, the “profit”.
Hummm I believe men have free will..they will do exactly as they choose to do
thin-skinned, eh theo?
I presented more current renderings .. seems that some think the doctrine taught to children changed when they were adults..
So tell me NL Did the apostles receive THE REAL ACTUAL body and blood of Christ at the last supper?
1) 21 Tradition was declared of equal authority with Bible 2) Apocryphal books added to Bible , 3). Immaculate Conception of Mary was declared doctrine ,… 4) the pope was declared infallible 5) the assumption of the Mary ,and Mary was made "mother" of the church
When ya point fingers at others.. there are always some pointing back at you...
To say that something is beyond the grasp of children and how Natural law thinks when he sees some sign is not a personal attack
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.