St Patrick's Confession (The Words of the Real Patrick)

The historical evangelist of Ireland, upon whom Patrick is probably based (and who was certainly his contemporary) was sent to Ireland on a Papal commission.

Maybe according to Catholic tradition...But obviously not by Patrick's own words...

LOL ... he ordained priests, for crying out loud.

I just read Patrick's account (again)...He never mentions the word priest...Obviously he knew the difference between a priest and an elder...

And unlike Catholic priests, Patrick never mentioned tradition but he spent a lot of time reciting and referring to scripture...

There is absolutely nothing in his treatise that would lead one to think he had a Catholic connection whatsoever...

Perhaps the Catholic religion stole Patrick's history and claimed it for it's own??? Naw, the Catholic religion wouldn't do that, would they...

History records that Patrick believed in the gospel of grace that has been rejected by Rome for centuries. What is garbage is your knowledge of either Romanism or history, if not both.

The Legacy of the True Historic Patrick (by former Irish priest, Richard Bennett)
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/patrick.pdf

And if at any time I managed anything of good for the sake of my God whom I love, I beg of him that he grant it to me to shed my blood for his name with proselytes and captives, even should I be left unburied, or even were my wretched body to be torn limb from limb by dogs or savage beasts, or were it to be devoured by the birds of the air, I think, most surely, were this to have happened to me, I had saved both my soul and my body. For beyond any doubt on that day we shall rise again in the brightness of the sun, that is, in the glory of Christ Jesus our Redeemer, as children of the living God and co-heirs of Christ, made in his image; for we shall reign through him and for him and in him.

Wow, the humble man of few words knew how to write! I noticed Patrick quoted heavily from the scriptures. Although we are led to believe so many were ignorant of such during those times.

OBTW...thanks for posting this. It has been a long time since I read this confession of St Patrick.

Here is a bit more to further your pdf file:

The Bull of Pope Adrian IV Empowering Henry II to Conquer Ireland. A.D. 1155

Bishop Adrian, servant of the servants of God, sends to his dearest son in Christ, the illustrious king of the English, greeting and apostolic benediction. Laudably and profitably enough thy magnificence thinks of extending thy glorious name on earth, and of heaping up rewards of eternal felicity in Heaven, inasmuch as, like a good catholic prince, thou dost endeavour to enlarge the bounds of the church, to declare the truth of the Christian faith to ignorant and barbarous nations, and to extirpate the plants of evil from the field of the Lord. And, in order the better to perform this, thou dost ask the advice and favour of the apostolic see. In which work, the more lofty the counsel and the better the guidance by which thou dost proceed, so much more do we trust that, by God's help, thou wilt progress favourably in the same; for the reason that those things which have taken their rise from ardour of faith and love of religion are accustomed always to come to a good end and termination.

There is indeed no doubt, as thy Highness doth also acknowledge, that Ireland and all other islands which Christ the Sun of Righteousness has illumined, and which have received the doctrines of the Christian faith, belong to the jurisdiction of St. Peter and of the holy Roman Church. Wherefore, so much the more willingly do we grant to them that the right faith and the seed grateful to God may be planted in them, the more we perceive, by examining more strictly our conscience, that this will be required of us.

Thou hast signified to us, indeed, most beloved son in Christ, that thou dost desire to enter into the island of Ireland, in order to subject the people to the laws and to extirpate the vices that have there taken root, and that thou art willing to pay an annual pension to St. Peter of one penny from every house, and to preserve the rights of the churches in that land inviolate and entire.

The remaining Bull here:

The Bull of Pope Adrian IV Empowering Henry II to Conquer Ireland. A.D. 1155

Thank you for posting this. I’d never read it before. It’s beautiful and sobering.

Thanks for posting this.

-— the difference between a priest and an elder -—

The word, presbuteros, can be translated as elder, presbyter, or priest.

St. Patrick was probably aware of this, since he was a Catholic bishop.

The word, presbuteros, can be translated as elder, presbyter, or priest.

It definitely does not...

St. Patrick was probably aware of this, since he was a Catholic bishop.

Prove it...

Interesting. I don’t remember reading that before. The hubris of Christ’s “vicars” always amazes me.

The word, presbuteros, can be translated as elder, presbyter, or priest.

Wrong!, and an often parroted fallacy. Presbuteros means elder, and is used in the OT before there was a Hebrew priesthood and sometimes separately from it, while "hiereus" is the distinctive word which means "priest," and is NEVER used by the Holy Spirit for NT pastors. Instead, hiereus is ONLY used for Jewish or pagan priests, making a distinction btwn NT pastors and them, whose primary function is different and not unique.

The only sense in which pastors are priests is by being part of the general priesthood of all believers, as all are called to sacrifice. (1Pt. 2:5,9; Rm. 12:1; 15:16; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; Heb. 13:15,16; cf. 9:9)

The use of presbuteros for priests is etymologically due to imposed functional equivalence, based upon the erroneous premise that NT pastors engage in a uniquely sacrificial practice as their primary function, as in the OT, but which is simply not the case.

Not only are all believers priests who engage in sacrifice, but nowhere do we see NT pastors engaging in a uniquely sacrificial practice as their primary function, that of turning bread and wine into human flesh and blood, or even dispensing any physical food in a church service.

Nor is this mentioned once as a prescribed function of pastors in any of the pastoral letters written to the churches or the pastors. And the only manifest description of the Lord's supper presents the body of Christ as the church , which declares the Lord's death by how they kept the Lord's supper as a communal meal of sharing, not by focusing on the nature of the elements.

And instead of the Lord's supper being preached as "the source and summit of the Christian life," in which "is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church," the gospel is what is preached as giving life," and edification by seeing yourself in Christ, and letting the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." (Colossians 3:16)

All of which is interpretive of the gospel accounts of the Lord's supper, which, as in 1Cor. 11 , was a communal meal, a "feast of charity," (Jude 1:12) and inn which it is not taught that the pastors must be the ones who give thanks for the elements and distribute them, and are never show doing.

Which is more evidence the Bible was not written to support its beliefs, for if it had then there surely would be a chapter instructing pastors on the absolute primacy of this ritual and how to properly change them into the purported human body and blood, and frequent mention of this as doing so, not just breaking bread.

Thus turning presbuteros into hiereus is a contrived convention.